Tipote said:

viktor said:

Yes, there may be some more jobs, but an increase in immigration brings with it a decrease in working-class solidarity, which means labour organisations like unions become much weaker.

---

I disagree. The left considers the global working class, not just national working classes. Have you never heard the phrase - "working classes of the world, unite"?

Quote:

It's not a coincidence that the USA, with its great diversity, has very weak unions and poor labour conditions, whereas Finland, with very little diversity, has strong unions and high wages.

---

Youre not really making a clear case that diversity causes weak unions.. it is castrating union power that leads to weak unions..!!!!! How does diversity play into that?

Quote:

The left did the bidding of the capitalists and the banks when they opened the borders. Thus, they betrayed the people who put them in power.

---

I would not consider those people to be necessarily left or right. They were coopted to sell out their countries but New Labour under Blair and the New Conservatives under Cameron are almost identical. Blair and Cameron both sell out to the banks and the capitalists. Its called corporatocracy, not democracy.

It is the left that mainly hates Tony Blair, then everyone else.

concerning your point about diversity and weak unions..
Large influxes of people who will work as cheap labour can undermine unions to an extent..but not by their very presence itself. If those new workers can join unions in time then the unions can become stronger with more workers. It is other methods of weakening unions that ultimately lead to weak unions. In the UK and US we have weak unions because of Reagan and Thatcher..and that was nothing to do with diversity.

---

qman said:

"More people mean more demand"

Wonderful, poor people with no employment can afford what exactly?  Nothing, the taxpayer pays for their "demand". When are you going to accept the economic reality that bringing in poor people into a developed economy does NOT create economic prosperity, it does the complete opposite, it lowers the standard of living for the native population.

---

Quote:

"means more money being spend"

Yeah, I'm sure the native population loves pissing their tax money away on invaders.

---

Quote:

"Germany is in the best position"

Because GDP grew at 0.7%?  Are you kidding me, that's almost zero growth.   A country like Germany should be growing 4-5%, the current state of affairs is a disaster.

---

qman said:

Yeah right, most flooded in to take advantage of the open doors, you do realize most aren't even war refugees?  Coming from Northern Africa is a choice, they want to live in the civilized world.

---

Quote:

Germany was a horrible choice because the native German population was never given a choice on the matter, the backlash has already occurred and the final chapter will not be pretty.

---

Quote:

Germany's government expects to spend around 93.6 billion euros by the end of 2020 on costs related to the refugee crisis, a magazine said on Saturday, citing a draft from the federal finance ministry for negotiations with the country's 16 states.

The figure is likely to stoke concerns, particularly among growing anti-immigration movements, on the impact of new arrivals on Europe's largest economy which took in more than a million people last year, many from Syria and other war zones.

The numbers arriving have fallen this year, helped by a deal between the European Union and Turkey that was designed to give Turks visa-free travel to Europe in return for stemming the flow of migrants.

German weekly news magazine Der Spiegel said the finance ministry's calculations included the costs for accommodating and integrating refugees as well as tackling the root causes for people fleeing from crisis-stricken regions.

Officials based their estimates on 600,000 migrants arriving this year, 400,000 next year and 300,000 in each of the following years, the report said, adding that they expected 55 percent of recognized refugees to have a job after five years.

A spokesman for the finance ministry declined to comment on the figures but pointed to ongoing talks between the government and states, saying they would meet again on May 31 to discuss how to divide up the costs between them.

The report said that 25.7 billion euros ($29.07 billion) would be needed for jobless payments, rent subsidies and other benefits for recognized asylum applicants by the end of 2020.

Another 5.7 billion euros would be needed for language courses and 4.6 billion euros would be required for measures to help migrants get jobs, it added.

The annual cost of dealing with the refugee crisis would hit 20.4 billion euros in 2020, up from around 16.1 billion euros this year, the report said.

The federal government and the states are at odds over the costs of the refugee crisis and how much Berlin should pay out.

Germany's states have long complained they cannot cope with the refugee influx and related costs and the report in Der Spiegel said states expected to face costs of 21 billion euros this year, rising to around 30 billion euros per year by 2020.

It said the states expected the federal government to bear half of the costs related to refugees but added that the federal finance ministry thinks Berlin is already shouldering more than that and does not think the states' calculations are justified.

($1 = 0.8841 euros)

---

Tipote said:

German government plans to spend 93.6 billion euros on refugees by end 2020: Spiegel

Quote:

Germany's government expects to spend around 93.6 billion euros by the end of 2020 on costs related to the refugee crisis, a magazine said on Saturday, citing a draft from the federal finance ministry for negotiations with the country's 16 states.

The figure is likely to stoke concerns, particularly among growing anti-immigration movements, on the impact of new arrivals on Europe's largest economy which took in more than a million people last year, many from Syria and other war zones.

The numbers arriving have fallen this year, helped by a deal between the European Union and Turkey that was designed to give Turks visa-free travel to Europe in return for stemming the flow of migrants.

German weekly news magazine Der Spiegel said the finance ministry's calculations included the costs for accommodating and integrating refugees as well as tackling the root causes for people fleeing from crisis-stricken regions.

Officials based their estimates on 600,000 migrants arriving this year, 400,000 next year and 300,000 in each of the following years, the report said, adding that they expected 55 percent of recognized refugees to have a job after five years.

A spokesman for the finance ministry declined to comment on the figures but pointed to ongoing talks between the government and states, saying they would meet again on May 31 to discuss how to divide up the costs between them.

The report said that 25.7 billion euros ($29.07 billion) would be needed for jobless payments, rent subsidies and other benefits for recognized asylum applicants by the end of 2020.

Another 5.7 billion euros would be needed for language courses and 4.6 billion euros would be required for measures to help migrants get jobs, it added.

The annual cost of dealing with the refugee crisis would hit 20.4 billion euros in 2020, up from around 16.1 billion euros this year, the report said.

The federal government and the states are at odds over the costs of the refugee crisis and how much Berlin should pay out.

Germany's states have long complained they cannot cope with the refugee influx and related costs and the report in Der Spiegel said states expected to face costs of 21 billion euros this year, rising to around 30 billion euros per year by 2020.

It said the states expected the federal government to bear half of the costs related to refugees but added that the federal finance ministry thinks Berlin is already shouldering more than that and does not think the states' calculations are justified.

($1 = 0.8841 euros)

---

---

qman said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/28/world/europe/germany-migrants-struggles-to-integrate.html?_r=0

Frank Weise (head of German migration agency)- "the refugees are not the work force that the German economy needs".

Yeah, most people know they will never contribute and will become long term financial leeches.

---

Quote:

Open battles have erupted with entrenched officials who argue that new, hurriedly trained recruits lack the experience to judge asylum applicants. The security forces want to keep out would-be terrorists and Islamic extremists, and to steer new arrivals to specific places of residence to prevent new migrant ghettos from forming in cities.

Mr. Weise shares those concerns but argues for faster handling to get migrants into German language lessons and integration courses, and then into the labor market. The government announced this month that it intends to subsidize up to 100,000 jobs for unskilled workers.

---

Malkuthian said:

To make a country grow we need people.
Therefore we need to reproduce, and create people.
Those people are given fucking shitloads of money for ~18+ years before they pay anything back.
18 fucking years.

Not really an argument for anything, just a little fact to have in mind when philosophizing on investments and such.

Personally I think there are more important questions than the economic ones...

---

A country can grow just fine without importing a bunch of poor third world people.

"Those people are giving shitloads of money for 18 years"

What people?  The natives supporting people invading their homelands?

"there are more important questions than economic ones"

Of course, because the economic reality of this situation is such a disaster people like you would rather just ignore it.

qman said:

Of course, because the economic reality of this situation is such a disaster people like you would rather just ignore it.

---

qman said:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/15/un-director-admits-syrians-not-fleeing-war-gulf-countries-havent-taken-single-one/

"The Director-General of the United Nations Office in Geneva has revealed most of the migrants from Syria are NOT fleeing persecution or war"

"The number one reason why people leave Syria is not the bombs or the food or the cold, it's because they want to find educational opportunities for their children"

There you have it Tip, right from the UN's mouth.

---

Quote:

Migrants are good for every country

“Germany alone is going to need at least 350,000 each and every year for the next decade just to keep their economy going, because of the attrition rate and the lack of replacement and the mortality rate. Over the next 10 years Germany’s going to lose at least six million jobs, that’s the total workforce of Bavaria.

“[The people who fill the gap] are not going to be home-produced, these are people that they are going to have to find somewhere else. Of course, there is a different between having people just showing up at the gate and a society having the wherewithal and the right to choose who they let in, and that’s where the mismanagement comes in.”

“All you have to do is look at your own country. The economy of the UK wouldn’t be what it is if it wasn’t for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis who came into your country many decades ago and who have been the backbone of your economy in many ways.”

It’s an indisputable fact that migrants are good for any society, both economically and in terms of cultural development, he claims. “There is a proven direct correlation between the number of migrants coming into a society and the increase of the GNP, for example.”

---

Quote:

Møller thinks that one reason the current refugee disaster has been mishandled is because most of the refugees coming to Europe are Muslim. “Eighty per cent or so are Muslims, and this plays a role, because the narrative about Muslims has been incredibly negative, surprisingly so,” he laments. “Every Muslim is depicted either as a terrorist or just purely a criminal, which is completely unacceptable.”

---

Quote:

Møller claims we’ve learnt nothing from other recent refugee crises, which we’ve handled with far better than this one. He is flabbergasted by what he calls “global amnesia” over people like Balkan refugees in the 90s and the ‘boat people’ in Asia, which could provide a blueprint for how to address this crisis successfully.

“I am baffled,” he says. “We had exactly the same problems, just with different nationalities. And there were a number of years where there also was chaos, and where things were getting increasingly bad. Finally we held an international conference, and from that moment the problem was dealt with in a much more rational an operational way, with holding camps where different counties would come and interview people, where we sifted through those on one hand who were clearly refugees and on the other hand economic migrants.

“The economic migrants were helped home with guarantees of no reprisals but also with guarantees that there would be normal migration systems put in place so they could apply for migration to wherever they wanted to go.”

For the ‘boat people’, international teams organised what was known as the Orderly Departure Programme for genuine asylum seekers. “They were protected there and they were slowly taken out of Vietnam, and resettled in different countries around the world. We moved half a million people that way.”

---

Tipote said:

qman said:

Of course, because the economic reality of this situation is such a disaster people like you would rather just ignore it.

---

who is ignoring the economic reality?

it is a burden, no doubt..but youve said that they will never contribute back into society. thats just not true.. and its based on nothing except prejudice.

---