International European Immigration Mega Thread v1-20,000 Armed Migrants Ready to Enter via EU Border

[JonnyRingo84]

So massive population growth doesn't harm Africa? Is that what you're arguing?

sure it hurts them.

but if you're an individual african, it most likely helps you to have 5+ kids. do you have a pension? no. do you have a 401k? no. do you have a retirement plan? no. are you a small time farmer who would benefit from working your kids? most likely. can your kids easily feed themselves with their labor? probably. none of what i just said is true in denmark.

so what can you do? tell people to go against their own interests and not have lots of kids?

the opposite is the case in developed countries. people dont decide to have kids, or not have kids, for their F'ing country unless youre nazi germany or soviet russia.

 

[indo80]

i call BS on these sensationalist headines...200 million africans in europe by only 2050? i highly doubt it, europe is already electing far right parties thus this is highly unlikely to occur. Its just a way for newspapers to sell some newspapers and to bring up fear in the population. The problem with europeans is that they dont breed, they will eventually be bred out if they dont start reproducing. They dont have anyone else to blame but themselves as its a cultural problem.

 

[Rygu]

the mali empire was pretty impressive. songhai. aksum.

They built pyramids too, and wuz kangs apparently.

 

[goldennirvana]

I would expect that if they are opposed to a demographic change then they would vote for leaders who would serve their interests. If they vote for politicians that bring in 150 million migrants, then I would not be very empathetic to their complaints after the fact. Europeans should vote how Europeans see fit.

There are European countries opposing this - Poland & Hungary being the most notable - and they get threatened with sanctions for doing so.

EU opens sanctions procedure against Hungary, Poland and Czech Republic over refugees

The EU launched legal action yesterday (13 June) against Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic for refusing to take in their share of refugees under a controversial solidarity plan.

The move shows the frustration in Brussels over the slow response to the scheme, which aimed to relocate 160,000 migrants from frontline migrant crisis states Italy and Greece but which has so far seen only 20,000 moved.

“I regret to say that despite our repeated calls, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland have not yet taken the necessary action,” EU Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos told a news conference.

Brussels last month set a June deadline for Warsaw and Budapest to start accepting migrants under the plan to ease the burden on Italy and Greece, or risk sanctions. Prague also came under pressure after effectively dropping out.

The three eastern European states all reacted defiantly to the decision after having led resistance to the plan since its outset in 2015 at the height of the migration crisis, when more than one million refugees landed on Europe’s shores.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/ju...gary-poland-and-czech-republic-over-refugees/

 

[uppercutbus]

Yes but @JonnyRingo84 said Ireland is an island nation, therefore people cannot migrate there.

I wonder how leftists expect us to believe they aren't imported, side-stepped through the system one way or another (the European "refugee" crisis is an example, ferry service, trafficked through Italy to Northern Europe, relaxed border checks, relaxed policies etc.) Another example:

https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2018/07/356_251512.html

Trudeau investing in housing just for them, do libs really think he'll make them
1: pay air fare they can never afford
2: be asked questions at the airport about how much money they have, how long they're gonna stay, job etc. = Therefore they won't come lol.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

They built pyramids too, and wuz kangs apparently.

the wuz kangs thing is stupid, sad, and historically inaccurate.

but mali, songhai, great zimbabwe, and the aksum were genuinely something the wuz kangs people could be proud about, but most probably arent aware of those groups, just as most other people are not. should be, though.

 

[panamaican]

Why couldn’t you trade with other countries and have little to no immigration into your country, why is that mutually exclusive?

Because the nature of trade is also about the relationships between the parties. And the more you trade, the stronger the underlying relationships become. And once that happens, it is natural that people will travel along the established trade routes.

You cannot go to someone and say "Sell me your goods or give me access to your resources but I don't want you in my country." More often than not, you will lose out to the trading partner who says "Sell me your goods or give me access to your resources and I'm indifferent to whether or not you come to my country."

You can certainly take the first option but accept that it comes with reduced trade opportunities. And that's because, at its root, trade is about human relationships, not the goods themselves.

 

[goldennirvana]

i call BS on these sensationalist headines...200 million africans in europe by only 2050? i highly doubt it, europe is already electing far right parties thus this is highly unlikely to occur. Its just a way for newspapers to sell some newspapers and to bring up fear in the population. The problem with europeans is that they dont breed, they will eventually be bred out if they dont start reproducing. They dont have anyone else to blame but themselves as its a cultural problem.

It's from The Economist. They are not exactly known for their sensationalism, nor was the '200 million Africans in Europe by 2050' the headline of the article, which doesn't back up your 'sensationalist' charge.

Europe's low fertility rate is not a "cultural problem", it's a civilisational problem. It's the natural symptom of generations of economic success, especially when women have freedom to choose how many children they want to have. Any country which experiences economic growth & gives freedom to women will see the same low fertility rate. East Asia is in the exact same situation, and India is following too (half of India's provinces now have a below-replacement fertility rate, and when you look at the breakdown of who's having how many children in India, the most successful religious groups such as the Jains, Christians & Sikhs have the least amount of children, whilst Muslims, who are the least successful, have the most. Hindus are somewhere in the middle). South America's fertility rates have plummeted too, over the past 50 years.

 

[indo80]

It's from The Economist. They are not exactly known for their sensationalism, nor was the '200 million Africans in Europe by 2050' the headline of the article, which doesn't back up your 'sensationalist' charge.

Europe's low fertility rate is not a "cultural problem", it's a civilisational problem. It's the natural symptom of generations of economic success, especially when women have freedom to choose how many children they want to have. Any country which experiences economic growth & gives freedom to women will see the same low fertility rate. East Asia is in the exact same situation, and India is following too (half of India's provinces now have a below-replacement fertility rate, and when you look at the breakdown of who's having how many children in India, the most successful religious groups such as the Jains, Christians & Sikhs have the least amount of children, whilst Muslims, who are the least successful, have the most. Hindus are somewhere in the middle). South America's fertility rates have plummeted too, over the past 50 years.

you make a good point but a lot of wealthy arab countries have high fertility rates thus there is some cultural association to this as well.

 

[goldennirvana]

you make a good point but a lot of wealthy arab countries have high fertility rates thus there is some cultural association to this as well.

Not really. A few gulf states have fertility rates which are significantly higher than any European fertility rate, but not sky-high, like we see in Africa. And a couple of them actually have below-replacement fertility rates.

Qatar total fertility rate: 1.9 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/qatar/total_fertility_rate.html

Saudi Arabia total fertility rate: 2.09 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/saudi_arabia/total_fertility_rate.html

UAE total fertility rate: 2.32 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/united_arab_emirates/total_fertility_rate.html

Bahrain total fertility rate: 1.75 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/bahrain/total_fertility_rate.html

 

[Lord_Impaler]

Because the nature of trade is also about the relationships between the parties. And the more you trade, the stronger the underlying relationships become. And once that happens, it is natural that people will travel along the established trade routes.

You cannot go to someone and say "Sell me your goods or give me access to your resources but I don't want you in my country." More often than not, you will lose out to the trading partner who says "Sell me your goods or give me access to your resources and I'm indifferent to whether or not you come to my country."

You can certainly take the first option but accept that it comes with reduced trade opportunities. And that's because, at its root, trade is about human relationships, not the goods themselves.

This is just your unsubstantiated opinion on the matter. It also only really applies to countries in which there is a significant difference in living standards.

There’s also just a whole bunch of foolishness in there.

“...trade is about human relationships, not the goods themselves.”

Well, I guess, if you say so.

 

[panamaican]

This is just your unsubstantiated opinion on the matter. It also only really applies to countries in which there is a significant difference in living standards.

There’s also just a whole bunch of foolishness in there.

“...trade is about human relationships, not the goods themselves.”

Well, I guess, if you say so.

That's not my unsubstantiated opinion on the matter. That's been the basis of trade going back thousands of years.

 

[Amerikuracana]

The middle class must end, says the not even thinking current "elite."

I think Europeans need to move to Africa, because that would improve a place. I don't think Africans moving to Europe will improve it.

We are doing it backwards.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Like what happens with all empires, kingdoms, and peoples...the Caucasian mans time of rulership and world domination is coming to end.

What country has proven anybody else can create a decent place with a strong middle class?

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

The same will happen to the USA.

Not if we keep electing Trump's and not Obama's.

 

[indo80]

Not really. A few gulf states have fertility rates which are significantly higher than any European fertility rate, but not sky-high, like we see in Africa. And a couple of them actually have below-replacement fertility rates.

Qatar total fertility rate: 1.9 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/qatar/total_fertility_rate.html

Saudi Arabia total fertility rate: 2.09 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/saudi_arabia/total_fertility_rate.html

UAE total fertility rate: 2.32 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/united_arab_emirates/total_fertility_rate.html

Bahrain total fertility rate: 1.75 children born/woman (2017 est.)

https://www.indexmundi.com/bahrain/total_fertility_rate.html

interesting....the fertility rate in Saudi Arabia was 2.71 just three years ago in 2015, looks like they have declined.

 

[bad mojo]

In case you haven't noticed, 2 new muslim countries have already been formed in Europe in the last two decades, countries that have never before even existed. And there will be more like them, so laugh all you want.

 

[tramendous]

In case you haven't noticed, 2 new muslim countries have already been formed in Europe in the last two decades, countries that have never before even existed. And there will be more like them, so laugh all you want.

what are their names?

 

[Lord_Impaler]

That's not my unsubstantiated opinion on the matter. That's been the basis of trade going back thousands of years.

Trade is and always has been principally about money/economy, not “human relationships”. Although your claim is so vague it’s essentially meaningless.

 

[panamaican]

Trade is and always has been principally about money/economy, not “human relationships”. Although your claim is so vague it’s essentially meaningless.

I thought you'd already quit on this topic? You want me to try and convince you that trade has always centered around the relationships between the parties. And that when the relationships failed, the trade followed. Why bother?