Europe's huddled masses
LAMPEDUSA, Italy: Lampedusa is a speck. A rocky outcrop with clumps of cacti. It is closer to Tunisia than Italy and its houses seem more North African than Italian.
For a long time migrants have spied it as an entrance point to Europe. A toe-hold on Lampedusa can be the start of a life in a Paris suburb.
But now, with revolt and upheaval shaking the Arab world, this island is seen as the gateway to Europe by thousands of young men.
In the past week more than 5,000 Tunisians have made it to Lampedusa. The population of the island is 6,000. I spoke to some of the new arrivals yesterday. They are clear why they have travelled. Work. They are economic migrants. They do not try and disguise it.
For some the trigger for their departure was the collapse in the tourist industry. They also saw opportunity. The police and the army, after the Tunisian revolution, tread uncertainly. So a few stole some fishing boats and word spread that the waters to Europe were open. Information travels at the speed of a text message. Many of these young men had been posting video of their journeys on their mobile phones.
I pointed out to them that Europe had shockingly high youth unemployment. They shrugged. They could not believe Europe was worse than North Africa. Another said that he had friends and relatives in Paris. They would find him jobs. That is, of course, the difference. The migrants see their future in the parallel and black economy.
On Lampedusa there are now scores of police and carabinieri. The men I spoke to were unfailingly polite. There is little tension.
So how will Italy and how will Europe respond? The Italian Interior Minister, Roberto Maroni, has warned of a "biblical exodus" leaving Tunisia. There are reports of tens of thousands waiting to leave. It is almost impossible to verify this. Others say that 60 migrants from Egypt have arrived in Sicily.
The Italians fear what may develop and are stressing it is a European problem - which clearly it is. Those I spoke to had their sights set on Brussels, Paris and Berlin.
Europe is struggling with high levels of unemployment. There are 24 million without work. In Spain 43% of those aged between 16 and 24 cannot find a job. In Italy the figure is close to 25%. Across Europe they are talking of a "lost generation", neither in work nor in education.
Those stats came to my mind in Lampedusa when I heard that some of the local fishermen had staged a small protest. "Help the fishermen," they had demanded. "Help us like you're helping the illegals."
So I suspect the question many are asking across Europe when they see the pictures from Lampedusa is this: "Will the new arrivals be allowed to stay or will they be sent home?"
It is, of course, the question that is rarely addressed, let alone answered.
Take Juan Fernando Lopez Aguilar, of the Socialist and Democrats grouping in the European Parliament. He said: "European countries cannot be left alone to deal with immigration flows. Common shared solidarity and political will are key instruments for the EU's border management." That is almost certainly true but it does not address what many will be asking across the streets of Europe.
Sarah Ludford, a Liberal Democrat MEP, says "this is not an excuse for southern EU countries to duck their responsibilities". She has focused on the failing asylum system in Greece and fears, no doubt, a new chapter may open up in Italy. It is invaluable work, but it doesn't address the most basic question. If significant numbers in North Africa are on the move how will Europe respond?
In survey after survey ministers and officials are mistrusted on the subject of immigration. It is the area where an elite are seen to be out of step with the people.
It is, course, a subject that defies simplistic solutions. There will be talks between Italy and Tunisia. There may well be further investment in Tunisia, beyond what was offered the other day by EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton. More EU Frontex boats may patrol the waters, but the voters will, I suspect, like the fishermen in Lampedusa, have other questions they want answering by their politicians and by their officials.
In a few days the winds will moderate and the seas will calm. Then Europe will discover whether the movement of the 5,000 was an impulse, a moment in time, or whether they reflect a deeper change - asking of Europe's leaders difficult and searching questions.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~40~RS~)
I'm 
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
5,000. 50,000? 500,000? Where do we draw the line?
Shall we try and fit the population of Africa into Europe?
Complain about this comment
I understand the Italy is asking for 100 million euro from the EU to assist with immigration problems, supposedly justified by Schengan having made this a European problem. Since the UK is not in Schengan we should not have to pay anything to problems that it creates. Either Italy should be told they should have realised the problems they were letting themselves in for by agreeing to Schengan, or it should be other Schengan countries only which pay this 100 million.
Complain about this comment
I await with nauseous trepidation the first comment to plead for these poor Tunisian (soon to be followed by Egyptians, Morrocans, Libyans etc.) migrants 'Human Rights' & the need for each case to be judged individually!?
Let us be clear: In the case of both Tunisia & Egypt the general Public uprising overthrew rulers they did not like: Therefore it behoves every single one of those Tunisians, Egyptians to get back to their own Countries post-haste to participate in the formulation of their new Tunisia & their new Egypt.
The very last thing any of them should be allowed to do is remain inside the EU27 which has enough of its own problems.
My one reservation to the above would be if enough Tunisian & Egyptian immigrants to the EU could be found to instruct & inspire EUropean Citizenry in the art of Public Demonstration to throw-off despised, overmighty, uncaring supra- & National 'pro-EU' Government and thereby FREE EUROPE from its chains!
Complain about this comment
To quote Gavin: "The Italians fear what may develop and are stressing it is a European problem - which clearly it is. Those I spoke to had their sights set on Brussels, Paris and Berlin."
It would seem that the UK Coalition Government policies are working ... The Tunisian emigrants make no mention of London or its leafy suburbs!
Thank goodness for that.
Alas I fear I am being too hopeful.
If the emigrants get to mainland Italy then Europe is their oyster and, depite high youth unemployment among the indigenous population of the UK, no doubt (again to quote Freeman @#1: "5,000. 50,000? 500,000? Where do we draw the line?") the sheer volume arriving will drain more taxpayers income into subsidising housing, welfare and social benefits for Tunisians who have no right to come to the UK.
The problem is that these emigrants see Europe as a better place than Tunisia where they don't get State handouts courtesy of taxes paid by others or government borrowing on the never-never.
Europe has to learn that it is not brother's keeper for people outside of Europe and be more assertive and say "No! You cannot come in nor may you stay."
Complain about this comment
In the first six years of this century and for a long time before that, the conspicuously wealthy and developed economies of western Europe and elsewhere failed miserably to address the question of the imbalance in the global distribution of wealth. I am not talking about charity. I am talking about investment. But these prosperous economies and their corporate giants were too busily engaged in the process of getting filthy rich to think about the political and economic consequences of ignoring their near neighbours.
The terrible irony is that, post-crash, we are having to think about it all again when we can least afford it. There is Catherine Ashton's promise of new funds and now the Italian suggestion of more to come - buying them off with too little, too late.
Freeeborn John is right to point out that Britain, as a non-participant in Schengen, should not be a party to any of this. CBW is right to say that political upheavals in north Africa do not justify a mass migration at the very time when those countries need the input of ideas from the dissatisfied and especially the young. But these are not political escapees. By their own admission, they are economic migrants and, given the state of European economy generally and especially the high unemployment rates amongst the young, these new arrivals will do one of two things - they will either disappear into the underground of the black economy or they will turn up on the dole queues seeking benefit. Neither is acceptable.
I still cannot help but wonder whether the huge cost of securing and enforcing an internal border would not be better spent securing Europe's external borders.
Complain about this comment
The priority is to send them back and stop more of then coming into Europe fast. Stop talking and get them back to where they came. Send a strong message straight away. Of course that will not happen and they will be provided with social housing, benefits, etc and then they will bring all their family over. Next local schools, GP's and local services will not be able to cope. Finally the growing resentment in europeans will result in the rise of the far-right parties and the goldern period of a stable and safe europe will be over. Europe has been a soft touch for too long and now its to late to stop the process continuing.
Complain about this comment
Europe is responding too slowly thinking that this is something that Italy can deal with alone.
I have a suggestion for the italians; open two/three new retention centers but not anymore in southern Italian islands but well up north at the french and austrian borders.
Then, instead of deploying thousands of carabinieri just leave a handfull to observe the situations.
I can assure you that after one week, less than 10% would have stayed in Italy and most of them would have already reached Germany and France with plenty waiting also in Calais.
Then we can discuss of Shengen and whatever and see if this is not a european issue (and yes, the UK is clearly in Europe)
Complain about this comment
These Tunisian , Egyptian or whatever migrants , should be shipped back to their country of origin forthwith , no discussion or arguments .
Italy or EU countries should initiate a naval blockade to prevent boat loads of Tunisians leaving Tunisian waters . Vessels should be ordered to return to their home port , even under threat of being sunk .
Perhaps idigenous Europeans should give up their homes and migrate elsewhere ; let the Africans and people from other regions take over Europe ?
EU human rights will probably enable most of them to stay ; which could be another element in the undoing of the EU . " Hope Springs Eternal "!
Complain about this comment
First of all,I hope that Malta will not be part of this scenario, but if we get involved, I would like to express some thoughts that crossed my mind.
Who is going to guarantee that some of these so called migrants (to me they are illegal immigrants,no more,no less) might not be escaped convicts from the Tunisian Jails.
There is no danger for these migrants or fear for their lives in that country.
If there is,they must have done something to oppress the Tunisian people.
They must not be allowed to enter or stay in our country,because if they are no convicts, there is no reason to escape and there is no danger if they are sent back.
If they are convicts, it is imperative to get rid of them and send them back.
Complain about this comment
#7 - nevercouldchooseagoodname
You appear to be suggesting that Italy should export the problem. We have been through all this before. Remember the extended encampments around Calais for would be migrants to the UK who were always going to be illegal?
This is in part why the UK has set its face against Schengen.
The Italians need to contain the problem. If they are right that it is a European problem - and they almost certainly are - then the best way is to localize it. Spreading the burden might dilute the problem but it does not solve it.
Complain about this comment
I do agree that a majority should not run away. After all, some (if not most) took part in protests that overthrew repressive regimes and these 'new governments' need is for the young people to rebuild the country/economy and not fleeing in their thousands.
Complain about this comment
This will all revert back to the Human Rights topic, the usual woolly liberal left that sat down and created the various human rights conventions will bleat on about helping these economic migrants and all the others, whilst ignoring the rights and well being of those expected to pay for it who are living in Europe. No doubt the UN will join in the chorus of voices demanding the EU accepts them.
Enough is enough, those migrants should not be processed but repatriated immediately, no expensive bleeding heart civil rights lawyers, no ECHR court cases, no ECJ court cases and most certainly no national court cases. The legal profession will be aghast as will the bleeding hearts but for once the vast majority will have been listened to.
Now I await the criticism of the usual here, rofl.
Complain about this comment
The do-gooders all across Europe do not grasp that granting those refugees entrance does encourage more to come and to pay for smugglers.
Top politicians across the board are already bargaining about which country could give those people refuge, even though they undoubtly are economic refugees.
Also, they are leaving their nation when they are needed the most in order to shape the future.
What would Germany be today had the people migrated to America after the country lay in ruins?
In my eyes, they are the worst and Europe doesn`t need them.
Complain about this comment
#10 - threnodio_II
That is exactly my point; this is an european problem and Italy needs help with it somehow.
I have been reading more than once and from different sources that this is an italian problem.
The delayed response from the EU make me also think that they are happy to leave the problem with Italy.
I 100% agree with you that this issue has to be dealt either before they arrive in Italy or once they are here but if noone helps them then I think they should be free of transferring it to those countries that hide their heads in the sand and don't consider the broader picture.
Complain about this comment
"Those I spoke to had their sights set on Brussels, Paris and Berlin"
Ha! The clocked that Gavin was an Englishman did the maths, and omitted London. They arent stupid. They are more likely to go where they can develop seperate communities without state or social interference, and Britain is perfect culture for that with its lack of social contract or written constitution.
6 months in Italy
12 months in France
and then Britain Shengen or No Shengen.
Burying the head in the sand will do no good.
On the other hand we are missing scientists and skilled workers, and of all the Arab states Tunisia has had a better education system
Perhaps Britain should send a delegation and pinch the better workers first. Before the Italians cuff those that waste their time and pile them on a military C130 back to Tunisia as they have in the past. Unlike Britain their repatriation methods tend to be more efficient and less convoluted.
Complain about this comment
Why is this poor country Italy being invading. The Italian people don't even have a jobs for themselves let alone all these people that are trying to enter. I do feel bad for the people trying to enter, but why Italy? There are no jobs. Poor government. Let the Italians fix the messes they have first before trying to have anyone immigrate there. It's not a racist thing, it a economical thing. I think they should be safely returned to their own country.
Complain about this comment
will they bring their open mind and sense of reason with them? (now is that ironic or not)
Complain about this comment
#12 - Buzet23
"Now I await the criticism of the usual here, rofl".
Oh, please! Of course you process them. You identify them, finger print them, photograph them, put them on a database in case they try Spain or Malta next time and then you repatriate. That way, you know who they are when a week later they nick another fishing boat and do the whole trip all over again.
Human rights? Yes of course. When you treat your guests decently, then you have the right to tell them when they have outstayed their welcome. 24 hours, a square meal and a bed for the night ought to do it.
Complain about this comment
Buzet23 said (12) “This will all revert back to the Human Rights topic, the usual woolly liberal left that sat down and created the various human rights conventions will bleat on about helping these economic migrants ... whilst ignoring the rights and well being of those expected to pay for it … Now I await the criticism of the usual here”
Economic migration can be justified in numerous ways. I do believe that it should eventually be a right for everyone to work wherever they want in the world. I further believe that this will have economic benefits and not costs, as people selling their labour in a world market to whoever will pay the maximum price for it encourages the greatest productivity. In principle, economic migration is a very good thing indeed from both a liberal political persepctive and an economic perspective.
I recognize that given the current inequalities in the distribution of wealth around the world, there would be tremendous migration pressures on certain countries should unlimited migration be allowed today. That is regrettable, but given that is the current state of human development, we can still do something by allowing free trade between the West and countries like Tunisia and western markets such that people can grow richer in these countries without migrating. Then later, when the wealth inequalities between North African countries and Western countries has diminished we can relax illiberal and productivity limiting restrictions on migration without it leading to huge migration pressures.
In the meantime there is nothing to stop us from relaxing all immigration controls between western countries right now. In particular the abolition of immigration restrictions between the USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada is long overdue and would not create overwhelming one-way migration flows. The UK government, being outside Schengan and EU immigration policies, could enter into immediate negotiations with these other countries to achieve this to the mutual benefit of the citizens of all countries concerned.
Complain about this comment
16 Loraine, I feel the pain you are expressing in your comment. But if not Italy where would you suggest? Its clear that you in favour of these economic travellers settling in Europe. Why do you assume they are poor? It is the poor that get left behind.
Complain about this comment
By the way, I am getting very fed up with all this 'bleeding hearts' and 'do-gooder' claptrap. I want a practical, pragmatic and intelligent solution which deals with these people humanely but expeditiously. What is so do-gooding and bleeding heart about that? People who have rediscovered old fashioned reactionary values that went out with the arc do themselves no favours insulting those of us who still have some liberal values left.
#14 - nevercouldchooseagoodname
Yes, if the EU could help Italy contain the problem with some financial support, it would probably be money well spent as compared with the cost of contagion.
#16 - Loraine
Maybe something to do with it being a short boat trip? If they start turning up in fishing boats on Swedish beaches, we might have to think again.
Complain about this comment
The European Union has declared that it is ready to help Italy, which is facing an unexpectedly high refugee wave from restive Tunisia.
More than 5000 persons have debarked on the small island of Lampedusa, and the number can only go up.
A spokesperson of the European Commission stated that Home Affairs Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom is aware of the pressure being exerted on Italy; she has had conversations with Italian authorities. She has also contacted the Frontex Agency that distributes resources for safeguarding EU's borders.
The Italian government has declared a status of "humanitarian emergency" over the unexpected influx of people. Italy has also requested an emergency meeting of the Internal Affairs Council of the EU.
Authorities have organized the transfer of migrants to other parts of the country, but Lampedusa is still overcrowded.
Italian Foreign Affairs Minister, Franco Frattini recommended that Italy send ships to patrol Tunisian waters to prevent illegal crossing.
Minister of Interior, Roberto Maroni stated he will insist that Tunisia put a firm control and block the outflow of people from that country. Tunisia is complaining about interference with her sovereignty...
Refugees meanwhile continue to arrive, complaining of insecurity about economic prospects and personal security in Tunisia.
France has stated that, although it does not want to encourage emigration, it is prepared to take some of the refugees.
So, slowly, a plan of action seems to be evolving that does not involve sending these refugees back to Tunisia.
Complain about this comment
19 Freeborn John. Utopia? Does democratic choice come into to this? If a country's population decided it didn't want to have freedom of movement of unknown people into it's country would this be allowed? Your argument also does not take into to account structural resource restrictions.
Complain about this comment
The EU Commission demands that ................................ .
Complain about this comment
#3, CBW
#5, ThrenodioII:
A comment and a question.
We have the same problem here in the US. Economic migrants from Central and South America come to the US because they can get work. They often, now, have family already here who can help them with housing, taking advantage of the social welfare benefits on offer, and finding jobs. No matter how low paying or undesirable the jobs may be, they earn dollars rather than the pennies they can earn back home--when they can find work back home. They can save money, send money back home, and buy things they could only dream about before. Not only that, the longer they are here the better their skill set becomes so that eventually they can compete for jobs on ability as well as price. They often live many families to an apartment or house, work hard (most of them), start small businesses and often are what only could be described as good citizens, which many of them become.
Still, it's a huge problem. We now have eleven million plus illegal economic immigrants and the number is growing.
Since we have a similar problem, I wonder if we have similar causes. For example, agriculture hires hundreds of thousands of these people to work in the fields and processing plants and at wages that most Americans can't or won't work for. They also work in meat processing plants, which is disgusting work really, and for wages that, once again, Americans can't or won't work for. It's not just agriculture and meat processing. They also work in restaurants, nursing homes, landscaping, yard maintenance, home repairs, domestic work, house painting, electrical work, etc. The list is endless.
Clearly the problem, perhaps the biggest problem is that they find work. Homeowners hire them and businesses hire them. They get hired and they get paid, and nothing they could get back home back home can compete with that. The economic incentive is enormous.
Some argue that we need to make it illegal to hire illegal immigrants, but we don't. Even if we could end illegal immigration, deport all illegal workers, we'd find that many crops wouldn't get planted, tended, harvested, or processed. The prices in restaurants would rise, food prices would rise, homeowners and businesses would lose their source of low-cost labor and Americans would find themselves paying more for all kinds of goods and services.
Obviously, we have an economic incentive to maintain the status quo and political and social and cultural incentives not to maintain it. The economic incentive is winning so far.
My question is: is the problem similar in Europe?
Complain about this comment
Arrrgh (23) asks "Does democratic choice come into to this?"
Yes. I said that current inequalities in the distribution of wealth would lead to intense migration pressures to certain rich countries from poor countries. That would not be acceptable in the democratic countries migrants prefer, so i propose free-trade in the interim until the wealth equalities have been reduced to below the threshold at which migrations pressures are unacceptable in democratic societies.
And since wealth inequality between the main English-speaking countries is already below this threshold, we should immediately introduce free movement of workers between the USA, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Complain about this comment
#22 - BluesBerry
Economic migrants are not refugees. The moment you start blurring that distinction, all rational debate goes out of the window.
Complain about this comment
#19 - Freeborn John
#23 -Arrrgh
Actually, on this one, I am with FBJ - at least most of the way.
Universal mobility of labour would ultimately be highly productive. However, I am worried that his proposal regarding a cozy entente between the English speaking big players conveniently excludes South Africa. That could not be anything to do with such a more attracting the 'wrong sort' of migrant could it? (The ones would clean toilets for a fraction of the minimum wage). Has he considered the possible influx of cheap hispanic labour from the States? And why should the rest of the EU be excluded?
The problem is, of course, the inequality of pay rates. The traffic will tend to be one way all the time that incomes are appreciably higher in the developed countries and this is true of everyone from brain surgeons to factory workers. As a minimum requirement you would need to limit economic migration to those who demonstrably had a job to which to go or conditional entry that they secure a job within a given time frame.
Where I disagree with Arrghh is on democratic accountability. Governments are deemed to be elected on a mandate and if that mandate includes a free mobility of labour agreement. If the elctorate don't like it, they should elect someone else. Unless, of course, you are advocating direct democracy and a referendum once a week.
Complain about this comment
A storm in a tea-cup !
A catastrophe would be if all those Europeans who went to America, Australia and Canada returned to Europe with their children and grand-children.
Britain was willing to `sell´its citizens and orphans ( not always orphans !) for a 10 pound one-way ticket --just to get rid of them !
--what is the problem ?
Complain about this comment
25. At 4:48pm on 16 Feb 2011, d_m wrote:
"""A comment and a question.
We have the same problem here in the US.
My question is: is the problem similar in Europe? """
On the whole? Not at all. It is much more complicated.
US as an economy was built on the basis of a constant flux of immigration. Most European countries economies apart France, Britain and Germany had little to do with that. However, even France, Britain and Germany were not subject to illegal immigration but to planned (though some will argue how planned it had been) immigration. Immigration in France and Britain mainly came from the colonies where many people retained their citizenships while Germany was "calling up" immigrants to fill up the low end job market.
However all Mediterranean economies had nothing to do with that, their economies were not at all developed on the basis of any immigration and if anything, for much of the 20th century they were exporters of working hands themselves.
Massive illegal immigration in Europe came with the 90s at a time that ALL European economies had ever reducing need for working hands and a constant rise in unemployment let alone other problems.
Also it is noteworthy that in the 80s there were far more serious wars and far more widespread famine than today so even the logic of tormented hungry people knocking the doors of Europe is not working - Europe should had received massive illegal immigration in the 80s not in the 90s and 00s - and even the cross argumentation that the current wave is a result of the previous trouble still does not work.
It goes withoutsaying that there are circles inside Europe that profit from the existence of "black job market" (black means illegal/undercover, nothing to do with Africa), but that is not the reason that drags all these destitute people there. In reality if you study better the case you will see that not only these people know where they are going but they are fully informed and fully taken care by international legal/illegal immigration networks and there is evidence that information agencies, states and international financial interests are well linked to all that.
In the meanwhile for most of Europe and especially for the 3 Mediterranean countries, Spain, Italy, Greece, the massive immigration they received suddenly since the mid-90s was followed not by any financial benefit but actually by instant shrinking of the economies, a reduction in the production base, a step increase in the state spending and an overall societal regression. Which raises the question: who wins out of all that? Well guess who would win out of all that if not the one who wants to control all that. Placing aside the human factor and the destitute conditions of these people, illegal immigrats far from any financial factor, they are a short of an assymetrical army and a geopolitical weapon. If you do not realise that, you have realised nothing.
Complain about this comment
#25 - d_m
I moved from the UK to central Europe some years back so I rely to some extent on second hand knowledge but what I have noticed is this. The influx of migrant workers to the UK from eastern Europe began to dry up when the job market tightened with the onset of recession. In other words, purely economic migrants only go where the opportunities are.
My second point would be that many of the agricultural workers you write about are seasonal. Do you have a 12 month round orange crop? So why are these people illegals? Could they not have temporary permits for the duration of the picking season?
My suggestion for the States is not quite how it would work in the EU for admin reasons but what about a statute of limitations? After all, although the mechanics are different, if you are caught as an illegal in the UK, the chances are that you will be repatriated even if you have held down an honest job for 20 years. But if you walk into a government office of your own accord and put your hands up to being an illegal, there is a good chance that they will help you to stay rather than throwing you out. This may have changed in the intervening time but it was the case.
I suggest that anyone who has held down a job for a period of years, pays his taxes, has a social security number and has not been in trouble with the law should be allowed an opportunity to become legal. It would not necessarily change the economic reality but it would significantly reduce the size of the black economy and take away the constant fear of many otherwise completely honest people of being bounced back from whence they came notwithstanding that they have become useful and productive members of society.
Complain about this comment
@21 threnodio_II
"By the way, I am getting very fed up with all this 'bleeding hearts' and 'do-gooder' claptrap. I want a practical, pragmatic and intelligent solution which deals with these people humanely but expeditiously. What is so do-gooding and bleeding heart about that? People who have rediscovered old fashioned reactionary values that went out with the arc do themselves no favours insulting those of us who still have some liberal values left."
Question is, do you really want to hear a solution?
Just asking, because no liberal political party all across Europe has ever come up with actual solutions so far.
A humane solution would be quite simple, though:
The EU should reject most applications right away instead of waiting a few years.
Only people under very specific and verifiable conditions should be eligible for asylum and any serious violation of their hosts law should result in immediate expulsion.
In return, those people should be encouraged and enabled to participate in society (which isn`t quite the case right now).
But according to such a strict system, 99% of those Tunisian illegals would be sent home. So I am pretty sure that it`s pretty much inconceivable for the leftists and liberals around.
Complain about this comment
@26 Freeborn John
"Yes. I said that current inequalities in the distribution of wealth would lead to intense migration pressures to certain rich countries from poor countries. That would not be acceptable in the democratic countries migrants prefer, so i propose free-trade in the interim until the wealth equalities have been reduced to below the threshold at which migrations pressures are unacceptable in democratic societies.
And since wealth inequality between the main English-speaking countries is already below this threshold, we should immediately introduce free movement of workers between the USA, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand."
I do agree with you that free movement of workers between those listed countries would be a good thing.
As for the first paragraph, I see a trend in Europe against illegal immigration and even legal immigration. Using force in order to keep economic migrants out will gain more acceptance within European populations and I wouldn`t exclude the use of military forces at European borders either.
The gap between Africa and Europe is widening rather than closing. And so is the demographic gap.
Complain about this comment
threnodio (28): There is already free movement of workers within the EU. I want to see free movement between the mose affluent English-speaking countries too. If Schengen countries want free movement of their workers to non-EU English-speaking countries then i have no objections but is not for to say. However they should not hold up the UK negotiating that with US, Canada, Aus/NZ. One advanatage of the UK being outside Schengan and EU immigration is that the UK does not have to wait for other EU countries before beginning negotiations with non-EU countries on this.
South Africa is unfortuantely not much richer($10700 GDP/person) than North African countres (e.g. $9500 GDP/person for Tunisia). And the average for South Africa disguises much greater inequalities within S. Africa. For now, only free trade with South Africa seems feasible.
Complain about this comment
If Tunisia ultimately joined the EU, the problem would solve itself...
Complain about this comment
#32 DurstigerMann
Well to start with, there is a very real distinction between being liberal with a small 'l' and it is wholly unjustified to brand us as lefties. I am actually no such thing.
It may surprise you to learn that, apart from that comment, I agree with almost every word in your post. But you do make one fundamental mistake. Economic migrants are not eligible for asylum and neither should they be.
'I am here because there is no work in Tunisia and I want a job' is not exactly grounds for compassionate admission. So what application? Who is applying for what? A work permit or political asylum?
Complain about this comment
Please make the EU members wake up and create one force to control our border no nation is able to control is border in this global world we need
all nation to pull together once for all.
We need a European state now.
John
Complain about this comment
#30, Nik:
Thanks Nik. An interesting history lesson. I knew in some vague way that, for example, Germany had encouraged workers to come there, and France and Britain had colonial issues regarding immigration, but I had never into a coherent whole, which you so ably did. Clearly people move for various reasons. I suppose most people immigrate for tangible reasons like jobs or personal safety, but also for less tangible reasons like escaping oppression and securing freedom.
The timing of the immigration, as you point out, suggest many immigrated to Europe for reasons that weren't strictly economic.
I was looking at southern Europe and northern Africa with Google Earth and the differences are striking. Southern Europe looks verdant and inviting and northern Africa looks utterly desolate and devoid of life. That alone would induce me to move.
Thanks again. Your comments provide a new perspective.
Complain about this comment
#37 - john
And this border is somewhere north of the Hebrides or somewhere south of the Isle of Wight?
Complain about this comment
The EU should crack down hard on black economy to make less lucrative to immigrate illegally to Europe. One of the most important things that EU could do is to legislate that all monetary transaction must electronic and traceable, in short, usage of cash must be terminated and made illegal at least in the Eurozone area. As we are already quite largely migrated to SEPA system and paying with chip cards, this transfer could be done in a matter of few years.
Complain about this comment
Why you so worry about people. Look how well they fit under our occidental values
multi - culti - Disco dance
Complain about this comment
#31, ThrenodioII:
Thanks for your comments. I especially liked your point about purely economic migrants. We too experienced a decrease in illegal immigration in response to the recession.
We do have year around crops in some states like California, Arizona, Texas, and Florida. Probably New Mexico and possibly the gulf states as well. However, it's not just seasonal crops and work that attracts workers now. Permanent employment is available in a host of areas like construction, landsccaping, grounds maintenance, nursing homes, service industries, the list is truly long. Illegal workers work for less and for that reason find employment.
It seems like some sort of rational system could be devised, but I certainly don't know what it is. A system that would allow economic immigrants to work here and travel back and forth between their joba and their home countries, would create a situation where foreign workers would truly be competing directly with American workers for what are considered 'good' jobs. That sort of competition would almost certainly put downward pressure on wages. The end result would probably be politically untennable and possibly a flash point for violence.
I also agree that anyone who has over some period of time demonstrated the attributes of a good citizen, paid state and local taxes (only people who are here legally can obtain a social security number; niver-the-less, many illegal workers use illegal social security numbers and therefore pay social security taxes) should be afforded the opportunity to become a citizen.
Anyway, thanks fror the thoughts. There are no easy answers to this. I wish there were.
Complain about this comment
#40, Jukka Rohila:
It may be a black economy, but it is no less real because it's black. Cracking down hard on it wouold have real consequences for the european economy and for europeans as well.
No cash. Hmmm. Wonder how that would effect tourism and the tourist economy. As a tourist, I'm not sure I care for the idea.
With all due respect, your idea sounds like a kludge (in the worst sense of the word) to me.
Without trying to be unnecessarily critical or argumentative regarding the EU, since I already live in a federation, it seems like it takes a lot of cludges to make it work. It seems like that should be reason for concern.
Complain about this comment
#21. At 4:20pm on 16 Feb 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
"By the way, I am getting very fed up with all this 'bleeding hearts' and 'do-gooder' claptrap. I want a practical, pragmatic and intelligent solution which deals with these people humanely but expeditiously."
The use of humanely invokes the human rights lobby as always as it is totally subjective, just what is humanely. The distinction between economic and refugee is in theory clear but once the danger to their life (theoretically) becomes involved it is through the window. All claim they were threatened due to their objection to a political regime or body, and there are legions of lawyers (blood suckers) who earn their lifestyle by playing games with that. The activists who have created problems in their countries rely on that to enter the EU and when regimes are deposed it is the same.
Sorry threnodio, but enough is enough, it is time entrants were repatriated and whilst I have sympathy with your reasoning regarding processing and taking their fingerprints, dna etc I'm sure the ECHR will demand it is destroyed.
Complain about this comment
The solution is simple. Return to their own destinations. No more headache.
Complain about this comment
My take on this issue willprobably seem odd. Here goes....
Europe has a demographic problem. We have too many people approaching retirement and too few young people. Here I see a large number of young people who are sufficiently motivated that they take quite significant risks to their own welfare to try and break into the EU.
My thoughts immediately turn to; what skills do they have? Can they learn an EU language? Do they already speak French well enough to work in France?
My next set of thoughts; if they do come they are likely to compete, at least initially, for the low paid unskilled labour jobs. The jobs that now go to the EU citizens who already have the most limited opportunities. Large scale immigration from North Africa would nail the wages of the EUs most vulnerable citizens to the floor.
So here I sit thinking; at some stage the EU needs large scale immigration to adress its demographic problems. Closing the doors may be a popular move in the short term but in the long term we need the immigrants. This immigration will be to the detriment of some of the EU's most vulnerable citizens.
Maybe working with Tunisia would be of benefit? Perhaps engaging with the Tunisian government and aiding with education and training in Tunisia that could then be of use both within Tunisia and in the EU could be part of the solution? Unskilled immigrants are a problem. Skilled immigrants who already speak the language are an opportunity.
Complain about this comment
@46 ulkomalaainen
"So here I sit thinking; at some stage the EU needs large scale immigration to adress its demographic problems. Closing the doors may be a popular move in the short term but in the long term we need the immigrants. This immigration will be to the detriment of some of the EU's most vulnerable citizens."
Why would Europe need large scale immigration?
There is no need to replace the dwindling autochtonous populations. Actually, the demographic shift could have a positive effect in the forseeable future:
less unemployment = less wellfare benefits = less public expenditure.
At the same time, the workforce will not shrink as long as there are unemployed people, even if you completely shut down immigration.
What do we need 3rd world immigration for? To replace skilled labour? Don`t think so, Tim.
Germany is losing autochtonous, skilled workers by the tens of thousends every year. They are running away to other nations where they are more than welcome and where they can earn more than in Germany.
This is one of the real threats for which solutions need to be found.
And unless such problems are fixed and full employment is more than achieved, I really see no need for foreign worker.
The demographic problem is a fabricated lie. Europe`s population has experienced sharp declines many times in history and survived.
Also, basing forecasts on the last measly 30 or 40 years is nothing but a joke.
When Europe lost 10% of its population to the black death in 1348-1352 (if my memory serves me right), it took more than half a century to reach the old level.
The demographic decline is absolutely reversible without the influx of culturally alien people.
Complain about this comment
Send them to Canada, they'll take them in with open arms-all of them.
Complain about this comment
47. At 10:39pm on 16 Feb 2011, DurstigerMann wrote:
"""Why would Europe need large scale immigration?
There is no need to replace the dwindling autochtonous populations."""
Precisely. 100 years ago you needed 50 workers to collect the crop. 50 years back you needed 10. Today you need 5. The collection does not take more than a week. If the farmer hires local men and pays them correct salaries instead of hiring illegal immigrants and paying them peanuts won't change much his running costs (which are mostly the machinery and other such staff). If it is all about agricultural companies then they have to realise that employment of illegal workers is illegal, let alone immoral.
"""Actually, the demographic shift could have a positive effect in the forseeable future:"""
P r e c i s e l y : We are not in the age of industrialisation anymore. We have passed the age of automation. We are in no need of extra hands. Moreover we need to spread the unemployed. Also some sectors (highly dependent on unskilled workers) need to be reduced.
"""less unemployment = less wellfare benefits = less public expenditure."""
P r e c i s e l y.
"""At the same time, the workforce will not shrink as long as there are unemployed people, even if you completely shut down immigration."""
In anyway, the market adapts to the conditions, that was never a problem.
"""What do we need 3rd world immigration for? To replace skilled labour?"""
Perhaps to give more work to our medical institutions which have become very lasy and unskilled having forgotten how it is to treat illnesses that have disappeared from Europe the last 100 years.
"""Germany is losing autochtonous, skilled workers by the tens of thousends every year. They are running away to other nations where they are more than welcome and where they can earn more than in Germany."""
That surprises me given the fact that Germany's economy is not reducing but advancing - slowly but advanving (at least in theory...).
"""The demographic problem is a fabricated lie. Europe`s population has experienced sharp declines many times in history and survived.The demographic decline is absolutely reversible without the influx of culturally alien people.""""
A b s o l u t e l y. Demographic thingies come in cycles. Some naif people believe that these things go on forever, i.e. the Europeans will keep on making less than 2 children on average and that Asians or Africans will be doing forever 6 children on average. Well absolutely not. What we see is an instant, i.e. a photo of a process that unfolds at much larger timeframes. 100 years back Europe was producing successfully much more kids than, say muslims of Middle East. To give an example, Turks a nation spread all over their Empire were not more than 12 million people while just 1 neighbouring nation, Greeks, were about 8 million people (Armenians another 6 million, Bulgarians 4, Serbians 5 etc. etc.). Muslims back then did raise successfully much less children than christians. Now, such things change and there is no irreversibility. It suffices for a European government (and no government ever aided in that direction - that is crystal clear) to give real incentives (not really money but the means - eg. kindergardens nearby etc. - to raise successfully kids), afterall the majority of women prefer to have 2-3 kids more and a bit less of a career than the opposite no matter if media sells the idea of the opposite.
Some also have to understand that they cannot "invite" by themselves illegal-legal immigration in the name of others. Human beings are not machines nor are they animals. They are not computers either to be erased and passed on with a new software. Illegal and legal immigrants come with their own ideas, own conceptions and misconceptions and have their own ways which all add up in the invisible (but huge, really the biggest part of) cost of integration and employment - let alone that for every 1 employed illegal immigrant there are about 4 who are unemployed and one way or another will have to be taken care at some point. However the most important is that because human beings are not computers they will not integrate but will try to pass on some of their software to the local society with whatever that means. If you had a culturally advanced society that can be quite ok but the bulk of those countries are not only culturally regressive but they are distinguished from their insistence in rejecting advancement and they treat the advanced European societies not just negatively but also as the root to their misfortunes - which apparently in the case of muslims of North Africa and Middle East it is not since even up to 90 years back most of them were parts of a huge muslim Empire that wanted to sell itself as a powerfull Empire and one that treated others as inferior slaves (slaughering and genociding them etc. ... so they are the last to speak of injustices...).
If you add up the benefits and disdvantages, the cost of acceptance of illegal immigration is hugely on the negative. Especially for the model of societies that most European countries have where the state is supposedly taking care of the people. In US this will be less visible since the state is supposed not to take care of the people, as such the immigrants will have to make it on their own. In Europe they do not do so, they work 1 month and then enlist for unemployment and it starts for them from there... Not anyone's idea of bettering society.
Complain about this comment
While we are discussing the pros and cons of illegal immigration and the humanitarian considerations ; these Tunisians will be distributing themselves around Europe , signing up for social security , taking your job and arranging for their muslim families to join them in the country of their choice .
Freeborn John advocates free movement of labour around the world . Chinese will move in , take all your jobs , take over the businesses and the entire economy .
We are already getting cries that multiculturism doesn't work . How do we suppose that these people are going to integrate ? They won't !!!
Without the EU and Schengen , European countries would not have this problem of mass illegal immigration and mediterranean countries would be free to deal with the situation in their own way .
I read suggestions of allowing foreigners to enter for seasonal agricultural work ; unless that is very tightly controlled they will stay on as illegal immigrants .
If the EU doesn't help Italy promptly with finance to combat this invasion , it will be another nail in the coffin of the EU .
I believe the only course of action is to repatriate ALL without question or processing ! the longer the delay , the more they will come . Navies should be immediately deployed to patrol the sea off Tunisia and other points of embarkation , to prevent these small vessels entering international waters . Boatloads of people should be turned around , sent to home port ; if necessary with a shot across their bows , warning them that they are in danger of being sunk if they don't obey .
Complain about this comment
Hi Durstiger Man
Europe needs large scale immigration to fund pensions and care for its aging populations. There comes a time when people are simply not fit for work. Using my father as an example; he was forcibly retired 8 years ago. The works medical staff were worried about his physical decline and he himself was having great difficulty in assimilating new information and working practices. Many of his contemporaries share his experiences, by the age of 65 they were done in and ready for retirement.
When considering pensions the important factor is the ratio of people paying in to the number of people the pensions fund pays out to. This figure must be as high as possible to ensure a good pension for the pensioners and low payments from the workers. This key figure is falling and is due to drop quickly as the baby boomers retire. There are two possible solutions; immigration to increase the number of workers paying in to the pensions schemes, or the baby boomers keep working until they drop.
At some point the elderly will need care. In Japan where they have even greater demographics problems than in Europe they are down to trying to use robots to care for the elderly. The elderly aren't too impressed....
In short, if you ever plan on getting old and retiring then you need a few people younger than yourself working away to fund your retirement and look after you. Where are these people going to come from?
Complain about this comment
hi, nik and everyone,
Perhaps, there should be opportunistic investment in these new "military democracies." Many if not most of the protestors were without jobs and wanted better living conditions, so the best idea would be to move factories there for cheap labor.
It sounds scary but its better than asking Egypt and Tunisia in to the EU, which would be a futile exercise--not popular.
:)
Complain about this comment
#51. At 06:49am on 17 Feb 2011, Ulkomaalainen,
A good in theory but failure in practice commentary, firstly just where is there a real need for lots of unskilled immigrants, jobs like that have largely been exported to the third world. As for them becoming semi-skilled or skilled that takes willpower, time and money. Secondly, there are plenty of indigenous unemployed for unskilled and semi skilled jobs, plus the many existing immigrants who have shown a singular lack of interest in taking them, preferring instead the welfare route.
There is not one shred of evidence that these new emigrants will contribute much in the way of tax or social funds and much that says they will not integrate but work solely in the black economy or rest on welfare. We should also remember that whatever feelings cause violence and unrest in a country are being exported here with these people. I saw that in Brixton years back when there was as much fighting amongst different ethnic origins as there was towards Caucasians, and we are seeing that now in many countries/towns.
Complain about this comment
Re *29
Tosh & Gibberish as ever!
Complain about this comment
Re *37 and John's comment, "..we need a European state now."
Oh no we don't!
Complain about this comment
Huaimek: The Chinese are not taking over our economy. Quite the reverse actually with Western companies taking over the Chinese labour market by relocating manufacturing operations to China and sending the goods back to their existing markets in the West. If jobs are being lost in the west to China it is not because Chinese workers are coming here, but rather because Western companies are choosing, in the interests of their shareholders and customers, to establish operations in China to lower costs. This simultaneously frees-up western labour to work on higher value-added tasks, principally in services. So this is a win-win for all; for western workers who can concentrate on higher-earning professions, for Chinese workers who escape the fields, for western customers who get lower priced produce, and shareholders of western companies who get greater profitability.
Tunisians should (for now) concentrate on establishing a business environment more attractive to foreign investors than China, including making their labour market more attractive than the Chinese. This will be far more successful in the long-run than attempting dangerous sea journeys to sit in detention camps or be exploited as illegal workers.
Also multi-culturism does work and Britain is living proof of it. Cast-iron Cameron should be ashamed of himself for travelling to Munich (of all places!) to say otherwise in a bid to curry favour with Angela Merkel who had made a similar illiberal speech earlier.
Complain about this comment
Idealistically, every place in the world should offer a reasonable living conditions to a human being. But it has not been the case. Some people has been born in deserts, some surrounded by flowers. And it looks like Europe has been a lucky place. (Judging only by those plenty of tribes and individuals, tending to populate its meadows and forests since the beginning of time.) So what is to be the realpolitik of the EU?
The subject of this column is clearly connected with the subject of the prisoners' human rights, from a couple of days ago. Are there limits concerning the human rights, imposed not only to each member-state, but also to the suprastate, to the EU? It must be nice and cosy to sit in a Bruxelles easy chair, and to delegate the problem to the Lampedusa authority. But the EU itself has its limits, despite all declarations and good intentions, and it has to be honest with that. There is no room for everybody to live in Europe. It is high time for those well-paid bureaucrats to touch the ground and start to act.
Complain about this comment
Re *30 and Nik's comment, "...massive illegal immigration since the mid-1990s.."
Well explained Nik & on the whole accurate (You're improving!).
Point of the 'quote' being illegal economic emigration & asylum emigration from across the Third Word (less developed nations for those with PC concerns) into Continental Europe and the British Isles began to rise dramatically and eventually expedentially with the inception of the post-Maastricht EUropean Union and Schengen 'open borders'.
The 'historic' immigration by former colonial peoples to G.B., France etc. is well documented and was almost always a 'managed' immigration policy in response to Economic/Labour requirements within old Europe post-1945 & the retreat from Empire.
Thus for the UK the most recent of these 'managed' intakes was from Hong Kong in the 1990s as the colonies/territories return to China got underway. An example of unplanned though ultimately managed intake of colonial immigrants would be the influx of Ugandan Asian community following their victimisation & expulsion by the Idi Amin regime circa 1972-73: 2 to 3 generations later members of that former Ugandan-Asian immigrant community now have thriving & significant business etc. in the UK, and similar progression is already recorded for the Hong Kong immigrants.
Just 2 of many illustrations of successful immigration that expose the utter 'tosh & gibberish' of QOT at *29 who appears not to have actually read Mr Hewitt's article or is under the mistaken illusion 'Lampadusa, Italy' is an adjunct of the British Imperial past!
Such an illusion is surely a "problem"!?
Complain about this comment
Hi Buzet23
"Firstly just where is there a real need for lots of unskilled immigrants, jobs like that have largely been exported to the third world."
True. That is part of my point. The EU doesn't particularly need unskilled immigrants, they will in fact harm European societies. The EU is more interested in skilled immigrants. Immigrants who can create businesses and investment opportunities or bring skills and competition to already extant industries. We have a pool of potential immigrants, why not start eductaing them before they come to the EU rather than after?
"As for them becoming semi-skilled or skilled that takes willpower, time and money."
Willpower they have, time they have in excess, what they lack is money. If we invest in their education we get better immigrants and the ones who stay in Tunisia; Tunisia benefits from a more eductaed workforce.
"Secondly, there are plenty of indigenous unemployed for unskilled and semi skilled jobs,"
That is true now, but what of the future? The demographic trend which worries me is only beginning.
"plus the many existing immigrants who have shown a singular lack of interest in taking them, preferring instead the welfare route."
If unskilled labour is imported to a society that already has an excess of unskilled labour then all that happens is that the pay and conditions of the unskilled workers are nailed to the floor. The obvious response is either to prevent immigration, which I believe would be a mistake, or improve the skills of the immigrants.
"There is not one shred of evidence that these new emigrants will contribute much in the way of tax or social funds and much that says they will not integrate but work solely in the black economy or rest on welfare."
This is not true of skilled immigrants. How do we ensure that the immigrants have the skills that are desired? Immigrants can be cherry picked but if the EU does not contribute to their training then this is in effect skimming off the brightest and best from impoverished nations, not really a nice thing to do if we offer nothing in return.
"We should also remember that whatever feelings cause violence and unrest in a country are being exported here with these people. I saw that in Brixton years back when there was as much fighting amongst different ethnic origins as there was towards Caucasians, and we are seeing that now in many countries/towns."
True. What do you suggest we do about it? We should be smarter than we were yesterday when these problems were allowed to occur. How do we prevent these problems? The simple answer is to make it in their best interests to toe the line. A probationary period after immigration might be one way forward: cause any problems and home you go.
Complain about this comment
Firstly anyone who arrives by boat from N Africa should be out back on the boat and pointing back, I see no reason for us to work out whether they are Tunisian or Egyptian etc. The only thing we should do is make sure the boat is seaworthy (and if it is not then make it so). If they destroy the boat then send them back by ferry to the nearest point in N Africa.
Secondly we have to recognise that the mass movement of people is driven by economics. Some of the problems are created by the rulers of N African countries, some of the problems we in Europe created. We can solve the problems we created in Europe, we cannot solve the problems that the N African countries created by themselves - we must leave that to the people of those countries to solve.
The problems we can deal with: (1) scrap the CAP. (2) re-double our efforts to free trade particularly for N African states. The CAP is immoral, we have spent 60 years denying Africa the chance to trade fairly in food products and by doing so we also deny them the opportunity to save and invest.
We cannot deal with corruption and tyranny in N Africa, only the people in N Africa can. What we can do though is to stop supporting financially and militarily oppressive regimes.
The N African people are just like us. They want to better themselves. They want proper jobs with proper wages. They want to feel safe and know that they can express opinions without being "disappeared" by internal security forces. Do you real think they would move from their home country if they had any faith in their ability to achieve this at home?
If we remove the economic shackles that we have imposed on Africa and at the same time make it clear that illegal immigrants will be very harshly and immediately dealt with, I think we should trust N Africa to sort itself out
Complain about this comment
Immigration is an international problem not just Europe. Its caused by a number of things not least over population and a failure to get a trade agreement which would help countries like Egypt. Those that think its easy to just ship them back and close the borders should reflect on the consequences. It would make matters worse because it would lead to extremism in the arab world. Could they do damage to our economy, certainly if they closed the suez canal or put pressure on Opec to raise the price of oil.So think before making short term ideas.
Complain about this comment
This is a serious problem for Italy. However after the collapse in her economic output Greece is likely to be less affected.Many may be unaware of the bad news that has been released on Greece this week...
Complain about this comment
Europe's huddled masses
_________________________
NORTHERN EUROPEAN POWER
It appears that northern Europe is slowly and steadily bringing southern Europe to her heels.
NEW HANSEATIC LEAGUE
Britain will have to be best of friends with Germany for the perceived greater good of the new Hanseatic League.
YOUR RACE IS YOUR RELIGION
Like it or not the new slogan for Europe is "Your Race is Your Religion".
Does that all make sense?
Complain about this comment
The double-standards of the usual EU supporters on here knows no bounds. On what principle do they support free movement of workers within the ad-hoc group of countries that make up the European single market (some of which are only marginally richer than Tunisia) but then deny this to others such as Tunisians? Presumably they believe in asymmetric rights that they are entitled to but which others can be denied? Borders that are open to them, but closed to anyone else with a datrker skin. EU supporters have more in common with the worst sort of bigoted nationalists than they care to admit.
Complain about this comment
@51 Ulkomaalainen
"Europe needs large scale immigration to fund pensions and care for its aging populations. There comes a time when people are simply not fit for work. Using my father as an example; he was forcibly retired 8 years ago. The works medical staff were worried about his physical decline and he himself was having great difficulty in assimilating new information and working practices. Many of his contemporaries share his experiences, by the age of 65 they were done in and ready for retirement."
If only all people really were retired at the age of 65. In Germany, companies are using early retirement to get rid of eployees deemed too old.
"When considering pensions the important factor is the ratio of people paying in to the number of people the pensions fund pays out to. This figure must be as high as possible to ensure a good pension for the pensioners and low payments from the workers. This key figure is falling and is due to drop quickly as the baby boomers retire. There are two possible solutions; immigration to increase the number of workers paying in to the pensions schemes, or the baby boomers keep working until they drop."
As long as there are unemployed people, there are enough people to take the vacant spots. Of course, this demands good vocational education.
I have yet to hear a good argument for massive immigration into Europe as a means to escape the demographic decline.
In Germany, there are around 1,2 million foreign nationals receiving wellfare. That about 1/5th, not taking into account naturalized immigrants of who a significant part also makes a living off social benefits. The costs for this go into the tens of billions.
Could anybody please explain to me just how mass immigration of uneducated and untrained 3rd world people can save the economically strongest continent on the planet?
Just like Germany had to beg Turkey for their skilled workers so they would rebuild our country, I suppose?
Complain about this comment
" At 2:29pm on 16 Feb 2011, DestroytheEU"
EUprisoner: It is nice to see somebody using an aggressive anti-"EU" name.
It is quite clear that being polite with the people who have rammed the Lisbon Rubbish down our throats is a mistake.
They have taken politeness to be an indication of weakness and an invitation to further integrationist aggression.
Glad the Egyptians got rid of Mubarak. Hope they will get democracy.
Nice to see other Arabs rising up against dictatorship.
All who believe in democracy are to be praised.
Now let's get rid of the "EU"!
Complain about this comment
64. At 2:42pm on 17 Feb 2011, Freeborn John wrote:
"...
EU supporters have more in common with the worst sort of bigoted nationalists than they care to admit."
EUIprisoner: The "EU" is about sicko nationalism and megalomania. Their "nation" would be "Europe."
They couild cause more wars.
Complain about this comment
We could still try to help the Italians if we were outside the "EU".
Pizza YES!!!!
"EU" - NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
37. At 6:48pm on 16 Feb 2011, john wrote:
"Please make the EU members wake up and create one force to control our border ..."
EUprisoner: I don't want big-mouthed, arrogant, aggressive, continental-style policing anywhere in the UK.
Please wake up and realise that if we were not paying billions to the totally useless, totally unnecesary "EU" we would not be needing all these cuts in the UK.
Complain about this comment
The financial collapse and the side the governments chose to be on continues to have consequences. This was a tsunami that continues to roll across the globe. The Arab revolutions are about economic opportunity...jobs....jobs lost in the crisis and the accumulation of wealth. These populations of economic refugees is happening in many places. The failure to address the loss of the personal wealth of the middle class has severely impacted the decisions to purchase. Small businesses are the engine to every economy yet vast governmental efforts are in favor of large businesses...of course collecting bribes from the few is easier than collecting bribes from the many.
The current path to economic recovery remains strewn with the debris of the robbery.
Complain about this comment
65 DurstigerMann writes:
Just like Germany had to beg Turkey for their skilled workers so they would rebuild our country, I suppose?
This is a myth that was mentioned on this blog a few months ago and I wrote the following then:
The first Turks came to work in the country in 1960 and had nothing to do with the 'Wirtschaftswunder' that took place in post war Germany. The cause of this is best explained in the following extract from Wikipedia:
"The Korean war (1950-53) led to a worldwide increased demand for goods, and the resulting shortage helped overcome lingering resistance to the purchase of German products. At the time Germany had a large pool of skilled and cheap labour, partly as a result of the deportations and migrations which affected up to 16.5 million Germans. This helped Germany to more than double the value of its exports during and after the war. Apart from these factors, hard work and long hours at full capacity among the population in the 1950s and early 1960s."
As the article says post war Germany was swamped with ethnic German refugees being expelled from Eastern Europe or fleeing Russian invasion. Germany could not possibly even consider employing labour from other countries as it could hardly cope with this influx of its own people.
===============
And rather than Germany having to beg Turkey for labour this is what actually happened:
"The Turkish State asked Germany to recruit Turkish Gastarbeiter. Theodor Blank, Secretary of State for Employment, was opposed to such agreements. He held the opinion that the cultural gap between Germany and Turkey would be too big and also held the opinion that Germany needed no futher laborers, because there were enough unemployed people living in the poorer regions of Germany, who could take these jobs. The USA however, put some political pressure on Germany. It wanted to stabilize Turkey. The German Department of Foreign Affairs carried on the negotiations after this and in 1961 an agreement was reached. Pressure from German employers in 1962 and 1963 played a key role in ending the two-year limit on the period for which Turkish workers were permitted to stay in West Germany.
In 1961, a total of 7,116 Turks migrated to Germany to become workers. The recruitment treaty in 1961 made Germany the prime host country for Turkish guest workers and by 1973, some 80% of the Turks in Western Europe lived in Germany, and although this share had decreased to 70% by 1990, Germany remained by far the most important country of settlement for Turkish immigrants."
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
46. At 9:15pm on 16 Feb 2011, Ulkomaalainen wrote:
So here I sit thinking; at some stage the EU needs large scale immigration to adress its demographic problems. Closing the doors may be a popular move in the short term but in the long term we need the immigrants. This immigration will be to the detriment of some of the EU's most vulnerable citizens.
------
What about another solution to the problem? What about promoting higher birth rates to EU citizens by aiding families who have more than two children. Rising living costs in Europe are partly to blame for people not having enough children, they are just too expensive to raise and educate. I just cannot see how the only 'sustainable' solution for Europe is to replenish the youth through mass immigration. Won't that mean that in a few decades down the road we, the indigenous Europeans will be wiped out? Why is everyone keep suggesting that in order to correct our demographics we have to allow anyone that wants to move in the EU to do so?
Complain about this comment
#59. At 12:03pm on 17 Feb 2011, Ulkomaalainen
"True. What do you suggest we do about it? We should be smarter than we were yesterday when these problems were allowed to occur. How do we prevent these problems? The simple answer is to make it in their best interests to toe the line. A probationary period after immigration might be one way forward: cause any problems and home you go."
Absolutely, plus there needs to be a bit more normal practice used in accepting immigration, if you apply for a job you have an interview and the best candidates get the job. With immigration into the EU any old excuse is justification to the HR mob and their overpaid legal blood suckers, it should be that unless there is a proven need an immigrant should be rejected. In the case of the Tunisian and Egyptians there is no proven need and invented PC excuses as to they are in danger must be rejected as well.
In your paragraph you suggest a probationary period, quite so and it should be not just being a just and proper citizen but also that integration has occurred. I do not believe in forgetting one's origins but the customs, laws and practices of their new country must be accepted and followed. So why did events like Brixton happen, Scarman found some things in his enquiry but missed the obvious as it was not PC, dissimilar ethnic origins do not mix well if there is a history. If you want more proof look at the blockage in finding a new Belgian government, two dissimilar cultural mentalities are in an impasse, yet they are Caucasian and Catholic, what chance more severe differences.
Complain about this comment
Illigal Immigration has been a massive problem for years. Politicians cut social benefits and tax us to the hilt whilst they spin around in massive cars paid for by our taxes and get massive wages yet they do not care about us.
Will they do anything about this problem? Of course! They will let everyone in and let us deal with the problem in our everyday lives. We Europeans should learn from these Norh Africans and get ride of these useless politicians who do not care about us and never listen to us.
Complain about this comment
#75. At 7:07pm on 17 Feb 2011, OpensusueLinux
It is worth remembering that the UK Labour party sponsored immigration into the UK in an unpublished way, they claimed when it was found out that it was to build a multi cultural society. However there is a more likely reason, poorer people tend to be more likely to vote for the left of the political spectrum, thus if politicians across the EU like immigration there is a fair possibility of self interest being their primary motive. Their problem is that life is not so easy and people are not so easily manipulated as many in the Arab world are now demonstrating.
Complain about this comment
# 64 - Freeborn John
I am not advocating repatriation as a hard and fast rule. What I am saying is that we - the Europeans - either accept them but distribute around willing countries expeditiously or, if repatriation is the chosen course, we do it quickly and efficiently. The last thing we need are a host of unemployed people dragging out a dreary existence in transit facilities while the bureaucracy grinds endlessly on. It is a huge waste of public money, it fuels public resentment and - last but my no means least - it saps the ambitions of those who set out full of optimism only to be cruelly disappointed.
Complain about this comment
@ 59 Ulkomaalainen
Not to pick on you specifically as I do agree with some of your positions, but there are some points I wish to address, get my 2 cents in and all.
>>That is true now, but what of the future? The demographic trend which worries me is only beginning. (refering to declining birth rates and pensions I beleive)
I see this as a cultural issue (at least in my country)and, as such, it can and should be resolved by cultrual changes supplimented by changes to the economic system to maintain the freedom of internal social mobility, both upwards and downwards. (We only need so many street sweepers, but things would get messy with too few) Some points of thought: Career and material comforts before family leads to fewer offspring among people who have the means to provide for a large family; high cost of living/housing/education/debt leads to fewer offspring amongst the middle class; popular attitudes lead to fewer workers seeking unskilled/technical skill labor in favor of service industry or government cheese; etc. Importing workers may quickly and cheaply stop the gap in the short run, but it does not address the issues amongst the native population that are causing the problems in the first place. One must also consider the cost of naturalizing, training, and supporting large immigrant populations vs the potential tax revenue increase from thier employment.
>>This is not true of skilled immigrants. How do we ensure that the immigrants have the skills that are desired? Immigrants can be cherry picked but if the EU does not contribute to their training then this is in effect skimming off the brightest and best from impoverished nations, not really a nice thing to do if we offer nothing in return.
As others have stated before, why invest outside of the country? Why not spend the resources internally to build the skills and provide more training to one's own job seekers? Maybe I am just overly cynical but its probably because it costs less and looks more "humanitarian" (more popularity points on the evening news) to provide for forigners as opposed to infriging on the "lifestyle decisions" of one's own populace.
>>A probationary period after immigration might be one way forward: cause any problems and home you go.
That is not always easy to implement. Not sure how it would go in the euro-zone, but I recall that a major city my way implemented a similar policy. Illegals conviceted of felonies get the boot or something. This was promptly met with protests from "minority" groups. Also, you have to find them first in order to kick them out. Many illegals have false/no records so they can just skip town and dissapear. Court appeals on top of that...
Complain about this comment
"Belgium has been without a government for 249 days - longer than Iraq . . . To mark the event, 249 people plan to strip naked in Ghent, and there will be free beer and chips . . ."
Good heavens, is there no end to their inventiveness? I suggest an EU bailout. Given them back van Roumpuy. I don't think anyone else would miss him.
Complain about this comment
@ 79 Threnodio_II
Are you sure that such a thing would not be an assault on the senses of the ministers in violation of the geneva convention? 0__0
Complain about this comment
#80 - The_Black_Knight_Strikes_Again
Oh, I don't know. He looks harmless enough to me:-)
Complain about this comment
#79. At 8:05pm on 17 Feb 2011, threnodio_II,
Belgium may well need a bailout but the EU can keep the bank clerk until such time as he realises federations don't work, we have enough fools in both Flanders and Wallonia that still think the Belgium federal state can survive, or rather their nice little earner can survive, and Van Rompuy is a rabid federalist.
The latest idea from the MR's Didier Reynders, who is a French speaker, hated in most of Wallonia and a lover of Flanders, and whom the King asked in desperation to find a solution, is to keep the federation but make the German speaking area a fully fledged region, as if that will make squat difference other than increasing the number of civil servants.
Now here's an idea for the politicians that are so useless, they can all join the protesters, take part, be arrested and incarcerated for offending public decency.
Complain about this comment
"In the first six years of this century and for a long time before that, the conspicuously wealthy and developed economies of western Europe and elsewhere failed miserably to address the question of the imbalance in the global distribution of wealth. I am not talking about charity. I am talking about investment. But these prosperous economies and their corporate giants were too busily engaged in the process of getting filthy rich to think about the political and economic consequences of ignoring their near neighbours."
threnodio. It is -28, and I have master-minded the solution.
I mean, I better tell it now, because I'm going to walk now someone, for the regular 1.5 hrs or 2 :o))))))
Step 1. By unidentified yet methods :o), int'l community supports Russian sufferers :o) in their attempt to be able to make their government do (at least sometimes) something sensible.
Step 2. Aforementioned Russian sufferers (so damn lucky with their governments from Ivan the Terrible onward :o))))))
reach their old demand "Land to peasants".
(it is plain indecent how many time we were promised that in revolutions ;o), and were always fooled) (but the old war call is still relevant. as ever :o)
Step 3. Every Russian gets a dacha land spot amount twice. one for the house, and one for sale.
(Note. There still stays half-Russia or may be 60% un-inhabited and no-one's land. "state land".
Note: Need to calculate better, I am not good in maths. :o))))
Nobody counted yet anyway, first idea.
Step 4. Those second dacha spots Russians sell to Africans, Indians, Chinese or whoever, Pakistani and elsewhere, other sufferers.
Get a little bit of cash, once in their unhappy otherwise, centuries :o)
As we see here on rare yet examples, everybody else starts working the land like mad, from happiness. Strange but fact, others know what to do with land :o)))))) - plain incredible but it is true. Most climatically un-fit Indians and rare Italian here, and even a handful of Africans - don't freeze but start pig farm and ome potato field or whatever. Incredible foreigners.
Well, voila. We get cash and spend it in several months ;o), not the whole world runs to the EU but a bit less :o), it gets less lonely planet here.
(we can only write war and peace about it)
Complain about this comment
Durstiger Man @65
"As long as there are unemployed people, there are enough people to take the vacant spots. Of course, this demands good vocational education."
Not really. If three people retire and three young people take their places how much tax do the young need to pay to fund the pensions of the people they replace. Most EU countries run their pension systems on a pay as you go principles and do not have saved funds on which to fall back. A pensions system relies on growth, that more people enter the system to pay in than exit the system to take out. To avoid punative levels of taxation the number of people entering work must exceed the number of people retiring to claim pensions.
"I have yet to hear a good argument for massive immigration into Europe as a means to escape the demographic decline."
Maybe there isn't an argument good enough to convince you. It is up to the nations of the EU to decide how they address this problem. If the citizens of the EU prefer another solution; choices will be made, consequences will be borne. I still like the idea of immigration to help iron out the demographics but what would your solution be?
"Could anybody please explain to me just how mass immigration of uneducated and untrained 3rd world people can save the economically strongest continent on the planet?"
I don't believe it can. But if we instead try training these immigrants then it might be a different story.
Hi ptsa
"What about another solution to the problem? What about promoting higher birth rates to EU citizens by aiding families who have more than two children. "
Nice idea but the retirements start now. It would take 25 years from a sharp increase in the birth rate until we have productive workers ready to replace the baby boomers. How do we plug that gap? Can the boomers work an extra 20 years? Do we cut the pensions benefits? Do we look for skilled immigrants? Do we do all three? I prefer trying to create skilled immigrants.
@78
There is a good comment describing the problems with probationary periods for immigrants. While tough rules may be written and agreed enforcing the rules is often beset by a host of practical difficulties.
The comments in the same post about internal training versus external training miss the problem. Even if there is a huge internal investment in training this doesn't solve the demographics, too few workers and too many pensioners. The question is where do the extra workers to plug the demographic gap come from and how are they trained so that the EU is not simply expanding its underclass of unskilled labour.
Complain about this comment
"What about another solution to the problem? What about promoting higher birth rates to EU citizens by aiding families who have more than two children. Rising living costs in Europe are partly to blame for people not having enough children, they are just too expensive to raise and educate."
We've got here Putin who pays 10 thousand dollar for every second, and 10 thousand more for every next consequitive child :o)
We are not happy ;o))))) (hard to please aboriginals we are :o)
The devil is in the details, one detail being 10,000 is not for the first child. Which barrier about half Russian women can't mentally overcome :o). Less men than women, defective salaries, no state support for staying with the first child at home, lovely medical service ;o), "salary cap" that the company you were employed in before giving birth, a ceiling, state-defined, on the salary the employer pays you when you are looking after the baby (whatever you actually earned before - when you have a child - you get paid less :o))))))))
Etc. etc. what's with this and that. VERY uncomfortable environemnt for (previously) working mums.
When you were, say, ill, and haven't worked the year immediately before child birth - you simply get nil :o)))))))
(in dear old Soviet USSR the employer paid you the salary for 3 years after child' birth. Whether you are working or staying at home with the baby)
(we've got long memory :o)
But modern Russia is surely much more poor!
;o)))))))))))
The next detail is $10,000 is not paid when the 2nd child is born, but only when he/she turns 3 years old.
The state rightly suspects that, given these favourable condition for baby production :o))))), the second baby might not live up to 3 years.
And state money is wasted so.
The third detail ten thousand is not for daily spending but can only be used a a voucher toward that said second child education when he/she grows up completely :o))))))), or - can be invested as a voucher at once towards an apartment buying or an own house-building. (this is, at least, something).
The only thing, in short, this programme resulted in, so far, is many holders of old Soviet passports from Central Asia applied for the econd, Russian citizenship, on top of being Uzbek, Azerbajanee, Tajik, etc., and got them - as Russia's "ex".
So here they come for birth-giving, St. Petersburg hospital, for example, have reported for the last year that 1/2 of births exactly given (FOC) in them was eh, "near abroad" citizens.
Muslim families from Central Asia have no silly "mental barriers" or reservations re the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth children etc. :o)))), and keep Putin happy how lovely his programme works and all.
While the mot common answer from Russians to "why not a baby?" is "What for to multiply poverty?" "I won't be able to bring him up properly in terms of health and education."
Complain about this comment
#56 Freeborn John
I have to disagree with you ; in fact I consider your reply to my #50 a nonsense . Perhaps you are unaware of large Chinese colonies in Italy , who take over businesses , set up sweatshops and corner markets .
In Southeast Asia all big businesses are run by Chinese , or secondly Indians , no matter which country . You say that European workers can be freed for service industries . What about the outsourcing of services to countries like India ?
Businesses that entrepeneurs have transfered to China rob Europe of work and jobs . European workers are too expensive for the end product .
When I lived in Italy there were wonderful Chinese goods sold in markets at very reasonable prices and of excellent quality .
At present there is not free migration and movement of workers around the world ; but I'd bet that if Chinese had the opportunity to set up business in Britain , many workers would come from China .
People come to Italy from Africa , because it is only a short trip from Tunisia to Lampedusa . If the European Union had not set itself up as a large and prosperous? area , with the Schengen giving free movement over most of Europe ; people would not be flocking to to migrate there .
Earlier migrants from Pakistan and The West Indies integrated well .
Today emigrants are not integrating , mulitculturism is the cause and does not work . There has been unrest in parts of London and more so in the east midlands . If I go to Portobello road market on a Saturday morning and see prosperous people of all colours and races , happily shopping together , that is not multiculturism , those people are integrated . Angela Merkel and David Cameron are not the first to say multiculturism doesn't work ; it has been said in Europe some years ago .
It is a fine idea to set the Tunisians up in productive business in their own country ; but they do not have the business skills of , say , Chinese .
It is my belief that with the separateness of EEC sovereign states , with closed borders , this invasion of economic migrants would not be happening .
Complain about this comment
#83. At 10:47pm on 17 Feb 2011, WebAliceinwonderland & 85,
As usual an interesting illustration from you, especially the bit about "Muslim families from Central Asia have no silly "mental barriers" or reservations re the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth children etc".
As has already been said here in some posts the birthrate tends to be high in those sectors of society that are generally work shy and on benefits, and low in the sectors that involve a skilled educated workforce. The demographic deficit cannot be solved by allowing the immigration of largely poorly educated unskilled people and neither can it be solve by the EU paying for the education of people in non-EU countries. Many of these countries from which people are leaving have plenty of natural assets but the money generated goes into the corrupt despotic rulers pockets, so why should the EU or companies pay for what their rulers should be paying.
There is far too much acceptance of corrupt African (and Arab) leadership and the poverty that leadership bestows on its peoples and the EU should not accept immigration because of that self inflicted poverty. The despots throughout the Arab and African worlds should be forced to solve their countries problems rather than lavishing in plush luxury palaces and enjoying being feted by the worlds politicians and countries eager to get their hands on assets.
Complain about this comment
Hi Buzet 23 #87
"The demographic deficit cannot be solved by allowing the immigration of largely poorly educated unskilled people"
I'm with you so far...
"... and neither can it be solve by the EU paying for the education of people in non-EU countries."
..and here you lose me. Why wouldn't it work?
"Many of these countries from which people are leaving have plenty of natural assets but the money generated goes into the corrupt despotic rulers pockets, so why should the EU or companies pay for what their rulers should be paying."
Because its in the best long term interests of the EU to do so. To improve the education of the economic refugees to avoid building an unskilled underclass of illegal immigrants is in the interests of the EU. To increase the potential of neighbouring nations as trading parteners by advancing their social development is in the interests of the EU.
Thinking about it this is pretty much the same rationale that is used to justify the internal transfer of funds within the EU. If the EU invests money in the development of the weaker nations within its membership is it really such a jump to apply similar reasoning to the nations along the coast of North Africa?
Complain about this comment
84. At 10:55pm on 17 Feb 2011, Ulkomaalainen wrote:
Nice idea but the retirements start now. It would take 25 years from a sharp increase in the birth rate until we have productive workers ready to replace the baby boomers. How do we plug that gap? Can the boomers work an extra 20 years? Do we cut the pensions benefits? Do we look for skilled immigrants? Do we do all three? I prefer trying to create skilled immigrants.
------
A very valid concern but still it does not convince me. As the Euro states are very different, let us start with the North. In countries like Germany, France and the Netherlands I have not seen empty factories waiting for millions of workers to start. These migrant workers may be cheaper to employ but life is not so cheap in those countries so you still need to pay a decent salary. As already mentioned, unemployment rates are going up, there are people that can fill empty posts. In the South, where most countries are already overwhelmed by 1st generation skill-less (and mostly illegal) immigrants, work for them - mainly in agriculture - is seasonal. For them to fully integrate through second and third generation, get educated etc will require as many years as jumpstarting local population growth.
I just don't see how all these immigrants will not end begging, living in squats and living on small state benefits. When I left Greece (before FRONTEX started patrolling the border), Greece was receiving over 300 new illegal immigrants a day! They reached a point where they managed to occupy private buildings, go on hunger strikes and demanded legal status to be given to them. When all those who enter realize that there are no jobs for them, they will just do what they have to do to survive, whatever that may be. Controlled immigration is the way to work, massively legalizing illegal presence in the EU is not the solution, where do you stop with that? I see those numbers of people arriving at our shores and wonder, who are they as individuals, what do we know about them, what is their criminal record?
Complain about this comment
No point in "the people"protesting over these mass immigrations as the Liberal political elite of the EU and the UK will never listen to reason,they will all be allowed to stay anywhere in Europe,including the UK,to be supported by the rest of us peasants who are already struggling to make ends meet thanks to the above"Leaders"and their banking comrades.
We really do need a peoples revolution here.
Complain about this comment
One does not flee from democracy. Send them back.
Complain about this comment
#88. At 08:24am on 18 Feb 2011, Ulkomaalainen
I understand your rationale but for a number of reasons dispute that it will work, the theory is sound in that if their education was improved they would not need to migrate. Where it falls down is that it involves a huge cultural change of mentality, not only in the people themselves but in the culture of the management of their country. To remove a culture of inherent corruption and cronyism is proving almost impossible no matter where you look, mafia's flourish despite the law and that's in Europe. To make those necessary changes in an African or Arab country is even harder as you are battling extra factors such as religion and tribal jealousies.
This is why the French/German proposal for a level playing field of EU countries that are the same as Germany can almost never work, the countries, their leadership and their peoples are too dissimilar. It is therefore time the liberal left of the EU stopped thinking they can cure the ills of the world and started concentrating on their own people who more and more feel they are the forgotten, disenfranchised ones. If not then the problems being seen in the Arab world and North Africa will come here. Most young here already feel disenfranchised, which is why a number of my sons friends voted national front here in Belgium, they feel forgotten in the blind rush to be seen to be humane.
Guidance and advice and political pressure is what is needed for these non-EU countries, piling money we do not have into the bottomless pit called overseas aid only puts more money into the hands of the ruling cliques and removes the incentive to change.
Complain about this comment
Several points to be made about the demographic deficit discussed above:
1. Regarding the increasing size of the elderly population which requires support and assistance, carers have to be highly skilled and well trained to perform that function effectively. There is no reason medium term why a new influx of immigrants should not learn those skills and go on to be successful practitioners and taxpayers. However, short term, they will be a drain on the system since someone has to pay for the training, housing and income of these people. The idea worked very well with the influx from eastern Europe prior to 2006 because, language aside, there were no major problems regarding integration and social adjustment. Indeed, many of those immigrants to the UK, unlike their less skilled fellows have chosen to stay and build useful careers and - as many of them are self-employed - businesses. No problem with any of that but we delude ourselves if we think that immigrants will immediately morph into productive workers whose tax paying potential will somehow redress the balance of the shortfall from the elderly no longer liable for tax. It simply is not true.
2. To those who would encourage families to have more children, even if you could 'socially engineer' another baby boom, you have to wait 20+ years before you start to see any cost benefit. In the interim, you will struggle to find hard pressed middle class families during a recession willing to put the benefits of procreation ahead of being multi-income families. Add to that the fact that many families see their older children growing up in the 'lost generation' world in which there is little in the way of work and virtually none in terms of fast track progress and you have to ask why on earth anyone would do it - unless you pay them very well to make that choice and that would bring us full circle.
There is a very real problem with the indigenous young who either did what was expected and required, went out and studied for a good degree only to discover that nobody wants them or simply gave gave up, took their gaming console to the couch and grew fat on cans and take-away. There really is no point in importing more youngsters or breeding more children if you cannot bully, cajole or entice the extant generation to adapt and be useful.
Complain about this comment
@71 margaret howard
exactly, that was m point.
@84 Ulkomaalainen
"Not really. If three people retire and three young people take their places how much tax do the young need to pay to fund the pensions of the people they replace. Most EU countries run their pension systems on a pay as you go principles and do not have saved funds on which to fall back. A pensions system relies on growth, that more people enter the system to pay in than exit the system to take out. To avoid punative levels of taxation the number of people entering work must exceed the number of people retiring to claim pensions."
Many European countries already finance parts of the pensions from tax revenue. In times of economic upturn this really poses no problem.
One should not forget that pensions do float back into the economic cycle of a nation at least to some extent.
When I look at the unemployment statistics all over Europe, I just do not understand how this continent could be in need of mass immigration.
In Spain, we even have a lost generation of trained, educated, but unemployed youth. Almost no nation has unemployment below 10%.
Regardless of the method used, this basically means that almost 10% of the potential workforce are unemployed. Even if you take into account frictional unemployment, the numbers are still high.
The equation is quite simple, really:
less unemployment = less social benefits = less public expenditure
more pensioners = more public expenditure
As long as the workforce does not shrink, you will only have a relatively insignificant increase in public expenditure, if any.
"Maybe there isn't an argument good enough to convince you. It is up to the nations of the EU to decide how they address this problem. If the citizens of the EU prefer another solution; choices will be made, consequences will be borne. I still like the idea of immigration to help iron out the demographics but what would your solution be?"
My fear is that what the political elites prefer will not be what most people prefer.
My soluation is quite straightforward:
The current demographic decline holds several benefits, at least on the short run. Unemployment will shrink and wages will go up as a result of a more limited workforce. When the demand for qualified labour increases, the wages will go up.
However, this can only happen without mass immigration to flood our markets with cheap labour.
On the long run, serious efforts need to be taken in order to stop the demographic decline.
Actually, France has done quite a good job here already and we could learn one or two things there.
As a last point, I`d like to add that further immigration will do nothing but harm to both new migrants and those who have lived here for decades.
European nations have failed at communicating their values to immigrants, especially those from the Arabic/Turkish culture. Sentiments against those groups are on the rise and further influx of people from these regions will only increase the problem.
There is nothing (but violence) to be gained from forcing massed immigration on the autochtonous populations who were never asked about the big immigration waves during the latter half of the last century.
Complain about this comment
63. At 2:36pm on 17 Feb 2011, Race_Equality_Inspector wrote:
"NORTHERN EUROPEAN POWER
It appears that northern Europe is slowly and steadily bringing southern Europe to her heels.
NEW HANSEATIC LEAGUE
Britain will have to be best of friends with Germany for the perceived greater good of the new Hanseatic League.
YOUR RACE IS YOUR RELIGION
Like it or not the new slogan for Europe is "Your Race is Your Religion".
Does that all make sense?"
To be honest, no!
No more than Your previous failure to account for why You left a link to an extremist Right-Wing web-page with the most unsavoury & inhumane attitudes to all sorts of "..huddled masses..".
Most on this blog have views for or against 'immigration/immigrants' to Europe. I'm unaware of any contributors sharing the totally unpleasant 1930s throwback attitude to all 'foreign' persons as revealed in Your previous link on another similar topic.
Complain about this comment
71. At 5:40pm on 17 Feb 2011, margaret howard wrote:
"This is a myth that was mentioned on this blog a few months ago... And rather than Germany having to beg Turkey for labour this is what actually happened..."
There You are!
You see Margaret!
When You really put Your mind to it You can be accurate, informative and very much a contributor worthy of mention.
Now, do try to apply all that careful, painstaking research & considered viewpoint in future when the topic includes the British/English: You'll be amazed how remarkable will be the change in reception to Your comments when You replace the blind prejudicial leap-to-condemn contribution with factual, sensible & balanced commentary.
Complain about this comment
Threnodio, Buzet, MargaretH, C-C etc.
Have You seen the previous blog?
Mathiasen has quit the web-page in protest at yet another wholly disrespectful & unwarranted MODERATOR CENSORSHIP!
I hope it is a temporary annoyance: Mathiasen was the longterm voice on Mr Hewitt's Blog of a seasoned & reasoned 'pro-EU' from inside EUrope via Denmark & Germany.
MODERATORS! I strongly urge You to consider what You are doing by Your constant INTERVENTIONS in which it is clear Moderators' ABUSE of HOUSE RULES is reducing this Blog to a point where a half dozen of us utilise it!
Moderation must be even-handed: In the past it has published whole series of attacks on G.B. whilst preventing publication of replies, Moderation has refused to allow my use of exactly the same terminology & names in reply to other contributors, Moderation has FAILED (I'm still awaiting an E-Mail explanation as to why mine & 9 other comments were CENSORED 3 WEEKS AGO on another topic!!!!!!!!!??????????????), and others using this Blog repeatedly complain of biased Moderation process!
What will be the BBC's & Mr Hewitt's views when MODERATION has driven us all away?
Complain about this comment
Hi Buzet 23
"I understand your rationale but for a number of reasons dispute that it will work, the theory is sound in that if their education was improved they would not need to migrate. Where it falls down is that it involves a huge cultural change of mentality, not only in the people themselves but in the culture of the management of their country. To remove a culture of inherent corruption and cronyism is proving almost impossible no matter where you look, mafia's flourish despite the law and that's in Europe. To make those necessary changes in an African or Arab country is even harder as you are battling extra factors such as religion and tribal jealousies."
All good stuff. Yes my idea of producing skilled immigrants would be difficult to implement, and you may even be correct in your view that it would fail, but is trying something different and failing really any worse than the current approach which we already know fails. Considering the illegal immigration into Italy from Albania. If the Albanian mafia fail to get the immigrant through on their first attempt the mafia simply supply another two attempts at no extra charge. Then once the illegal immigrant becomes established in a host country many posters on this site have commented on how difficult it is to remove them.
A cricism of my ideas about skilled migration has been the current levels of unemployment in Europe.(See ptsa#89) I invite people to consider the phenomenon of French immigration into London. London is now the 4Th largest French city. Many of these French people left for London to escape the restrictions of the French beurocracy on starting up new business enterprises. These people did not migrate to jobs that existed, but instead migrated and created jobs in an environment more amenable to their entreprenourship. For me the difference between French immigration to London and Tunisian immigration to the EU is primarily the skill set that the various immigrants bring with them. The French are educated, skilled Europeans and so bring prosperity, if the Tunisians lack applicable skills they will bring social problems.
Complain about this comment
I say bring them in. If they made the effort to get all the way to another island to find work, they will make more effort than half the idle youths in this country who can barely make it to the job centre. Can we ship them to Tunisia?
Most immigrants are harder workers than the workers we have in any case. What's the problem? More business, more work created, more tax, less debt.
Complain about this comment
#98. At 12:15pm on 18 Feb 2011, Ulkomaalainen
The sentence "Many of these French people left for London to escape the restrictions of the French bureaucracy on starting up new business enterprises." says it all, but it was not so much French bureaucracy as a combination of French and EU forced bureaucracy. The UK has opted out of many things that restrict enterprise in the search for more regulation, this meant that starting a business in the UK is far easier and cheaper than in many EU countries. I know from personal experience how hard and expensive it was to start something in Belgium.
All migrants encounter these regulations and rules but sometimes the applicable rules are overlooked for asylum seekers in that the need for proof of educational qualifications is ignored. Is this fair on the indigenous majority, most certainly not as it fuelled resentment. Overall though the over-regulation of the EU makes it very hard for an unskilled or semi-skilled worker to find work, and new migrants simply disappear onto the black economy, whilst often claiming benefits.
Complain about this comment
95. At 11:47am on 18 Feb 2011, cool_brush_work wrote:
_______________________________
63. At 2:36pm on 17 Feb 2011, Race_Equality_Inspector wrote:
. . . . . .
YOUR RACE IS YOUR RELIGION
Like it or not the new slogan for Europe is "Your Race is Your Religion".
. . . . . . Does that all make sense?"
___________________________
To be honest, no!
. . . . Most on this blog have views for or against 'immigration/immigrants' to Europe. I'm unaware of any contributors sharing the totally unpleasant 1930s throwback attitude to all 'foreign' persons as revealed in Your previous link on another similar topic.
________________________________________
AWARENESS
History teaches us that one must learn to read between the lines to avoid problems ahead.
Does that make sense?
Complain about this comment
I always though the guest worker approach Germany had was a good one in that they let immigrants work but it took 10 years before they got citizenship and full benefits. Those who go back to their country within that time can just simply leave and build investment in their own countries. Those who stay beyond that stage will be fully integrated into the culture.
The biggest problem in this country as I see it is the view of entitlement to get benefits without the requirement to work, regardless of the cost to society. I also think the City has this destructive mindset. The illusion of money "working for you". Immigrants have in the main a much more practical mindset that would be useful not just to the economy but also as an example for the young brought up in our system.
Complain about this comment
"History teaches us that one must learn to read between the lines to avoid problems ahead.
Does that make sense?
"
Imprison the likes of Oswald Mosley and his cronies while you get the chance? Is that what you mean?
Complain about this comment
To: MODERATORS
Mr Hewitt's article - 'The EUroZone Crisis & the Voters' on 25th January.
ALL THE FOLLOWING 'REFERRAL' TO MODERATORS REMAIN UNEXPLAINED!!!!!???????
148. At 4:18pm on 27 Jan 2011, busby2 wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
149. At 4:34pm on 27 Jan 2011, WebAliceinwonderland wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
150. At 4:44pm on 27 Jan 2011, champagne_charlie wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
151. At 5:10pm on 27 Jan 2011, d_m wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
152. At 5:13pm on 27 Jan 2011, you wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
153. At 5:44pm on 27 Jan 2011, you wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
154. At 5:58pm on 27 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
167. At 8:46pm on 27 Jan 2011, Buzet23 wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
168. At 8:50pm on 27 Jan 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
169. At 8:58pm on 27 Jan 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
170. At 9:37pm on 27 Jan 2011, Buzet23 wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
171. At 9:49pm on 27 Jan 2011, Buzet23 wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
MODERATORS, said before & say again: Either do Your job and follow HOUSE RULES or stop interfering.
Complain about this comment
101. At 12:59pm on 18 Feb 2011, Race_Equality_Inspector wrote:
"AWARENESS
History teaches us that one must learn to read between the lines to
avoid problems ahead.
Does that make sense?"
Well, it just reinforces my impression from Your previous easy answer, catch-phrase response to complex and highly charged issues of Humanity that You have a particular far-right agenda to which in no circumstance would I subscribe.
End of.
Complain about this comment
MODERATORS:
I missed these TWO Comments from the Eurozone & Voters crisis article: They too AWAIT EXPLANATION FOR THEIR CENSORSHIP!!!!!!!!!!????????????
145. At 4:00pm on 27 Jan 2011, you wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
146. At 4:01pm on 27 Jan 2011, champagne_charlie wrote:
This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain
Complain about this comment
Mr.Hewitt,
What happens now in Lampedusa island is going to happen on the south Spanish coasts on the Mediterranean, on some of the Greece Archipelago numerous islands, even on the Turkish-Bulgarian border, no matter that my country has not yet joined the Schenguen agreement.
True, the south member countries of the EU cannot provide enough border control by themselves. They need the financial support of Brussels. But, there is an even bigger danger for us which goes hand in hand with the migrants’ incoming flow which you somehow underestimated in your report – the radical Islam. To that matter, I must agree (though reluctantly) with what your PM qualified recently as a “failure of the EU policy” in the field of integrating the migrants’ societies that inhabit our countries and that are going to become even larger with the incoming flow of youngsters who continue to infiltrate old Europe by land and by sea.
Regards from Sofia
Complain about this comment
@93 ThrenodioII
Good analysis. You are right to argue that the quality of the immigrants from Eastern Europe was much higher than that of the African immigrants. You are right also to remind us that in a period of heavy recession even highly educated citizens of the EU risk to remain unemployed, let alone the less qualified or completely uneducated youngsters who enter illegally the continent. You are also right saying that “there really is no point in importing more youngsters or breeding more children if you cannot bully, cajole or entice the extant generation to adapt and be useful.”
But who’s to be blamed?
Complain about this comment
@92 Buzet23
"It is therefore time the liberal left of the EU stopped thinking they can cure the ills of the world and started concentrating on their own people who more and more feel they are the forgotten, disenfranchised ones. If not then the problems being seen in the Arab world and North Africa will come here. Most young here already feel disenfranchised, which is why a number of my sons friends voted national front here in Belgium, they feel forgotten in the blind rush to be seen to be humane."
Hi old friend. However, not only the left wing parties are motivated to tolerate the foreign immigrants in their search for additional potential support at the next local/national vote cast. I put the blame also (speaking of the EU member states) on the liberal right, which favour the pure market regulation of the economy and not the governmental intervention in terms of well calculated approach that would guarantee a smooth and stable encrease of the living standards.
Complain about this comment
#108 - generalicimo
Thank you.
'But who’s to be blamed?'
In my view, the blame game is almost always futile. It either gets you nowhere or helps lead to to where you want to be in the first place.
Example 1: the 'lost generation' are the victims of the economic crash > The economic crash was down to irresponsible and prolgate lending by greedy bankers > they we able to do this because of the deregulation up of the markets > this was down to Reagan and Thatcher > all their fault.
Example 2: the 'lost generation' are the victims of an education system intent on churning out graduates in numbers without a thought for what they were studying or whether there would be jobs at the end of it > this was a direct result of Labour's policy to make higher education available regardless of means > this was a core policy in the New Labour comeback because Old Labour were no longer electable > its all Michael Foots fault.
Example 3: the 'lost generation' are the victims of mass immigration of a skilled workforce from eastern Europe > the EU were too keen to absorb the newly independent central European nations > they came into the equation in 1989-90 because to Soviets lost control and let them loose > its all Gorbachev's fault.
See what I mean? No point in apportioning blame. What we need is answers.
Complain about this comment
@93
True on 1 and 2
However, the lul in population growth in the mean time may be beneficial as it can force change in economy and government. See #94
From # 84 "EU countries run their pension systems on a pay as you go principles and do not have saved funds on which to fall back."
IMHO, the leaders can start changing for the better by actually funding pensions ahead of time rather than just paying from current taxes. When someone in banking takes Peter's funds, with the promise of future interest, to pay back interest owed to Paul, we call it fraud. More specifically, it is a ponzi scheme a la Bernie Madoff. When our governments do it, it is called pension.
On a personal note, I have to say that I feel on that cusp of that "lost generation". In my area, its not so much "trained, educated, and unemployed", as "trained, educated, and underutilized". There is a lot of stagnation amongst my peer group; both by age and profession. Dead end positions and "the service sector express to nowhere" is not quite how you put your youth on the upawards track. Recovery my foot, maybe in world of imaginary money circuits...
Complain about this comment
99. At 12:44pm on 18 Feb 2011, United Dreamer wrote:
Most immigrants are harder workers than the workers we have in any case. What's the problem? More business, more work created, more tax, less debt.
-----
It is a slippery slope when you start looking at the world around you in economic terms only. Even if it sounds like a good idea in economic terms, it can still easily fail and we have seen this with waves of migrants coming in, forming their little ghetto and relying (along with their 12-member families) on welfare. Also, you are completely ignoring the social effects of such a move, I don't know where you are from and what your opinion of multi-kulti is so far, but most Europeans have had enough with it, especially with cultures that are intolerant towards the social and personal freedoms we enjoy.
Complain about this comment
#111 - The_Black_Knight_Strikes_Again
Basically, the UK model - the original model of a welfare state in Europe - had the right idea. Taxation was to fund defense, education, foreign affairs and all the other paraphernalia of government. Nation Insurance contributions were intended to fund health care, social benefits and pensions. All sounds very simple does it not? but then some bright chancellor, I forget who, decided to bung it all in a big pot called national income which could be raided for anything from Royal Weddings to wars in all corners of the world. That was not so much a slippery slope as a plunge into an ice ravine. When Robert Maxwell robs the pension pot for added liquidity, he ends up belly up in the ocean. When chancellors do it, they get patted on the back for sound financial management and general booted upstairs to pontificate to the rest of us. Such is the duality of standards with which we live. The NIC should have been ring fenced, invested to the common good and expanded as required. It was the duty of the Treasury to insure adequate funding for these matters, not a privileged pot from which to steal.
By the way, get back to work. Do you really think we can afford repeated industrial action by Black Knights in times like these?
#112 - ptsa
All the evidence actually suggests the opposite. Most Europeans are very tolerant of the immigrant community - even, though to a lesser extent, the UK. The politicians are playing this card in an irresponsible way to maximize their electoral potential and they should colectively hang their heads in shame.
Complain about this comment
#112 Most people are fearful of what they don't know and let the media dictate their opinions without trying or having the opportunity to find out for themselves. Given that the media specialises in portraying the most scandalous aspect of a phenomenon its hardly a surprise that there is a tendency to fear it.
My personal experience is that immigrants (of whatever background) tend to be focussed on working to earn a living and building a better future for themselves. I'm a white person in Britain and I have seen an increase in immigrant workers but I have in general found their behaviour and outlook to be a far more positive and beneficial presence than the white teenagers I used to have hanging round the street corner.
As I say people have a tendency to let the media dictate their judgment and for the most part that outlook promotes a damaging perspective. They are generally focussed, hard working and relatively respectful. And I have a considerable amount of experience dealing with people from a wide variety of backgrounds. I just tend to trust my own insinct over one fed to me. Must be the Scottish background.
Complain about this comment
Ghettos, where they occur, are generally caused by populations moving out than a targetting of areas by a particular group. This causes property prices to drop and rental vacancies to be cheaper. This promotes a gravitation towards these areas to immigrants where money is in short supply. This has happened since time immemorium.
I have been in many "ghettos", black and asian, and feel a darn sight safer than walking through a housing estate full of racist and drunken skinheads. If there is an issue its generally caused by incumbent wasters who think they can happily drift though life without working for a living. Or doing the bare minimum at work (hence the catastrophic failings of industry in the 70s). First generation immigrants are not the problem if you are minded to work.
And very few immigrants bring in 12 member families. That is the press scandal mongering the worst possible scenario for a headline. Indeed that scenario is unlikely to happen unless they are refugees.
However, if they earn enough, most immigrants are minded to retire in their own country where the money they have stretches further and where they can enjoy a higher standard of living. Some get caught in the trappings of the country and remain and other issues arise from their children being brought up here. But hey-ho that's life.
I do take the point that some local authorities bend a little too far in accommodating immigrants who don't speak the language and make the effort to be productive, but usually the opposite is the case. For the most part local government gains a lot more than they lose, even if occasionally they stop extending services sufficiently.
Complain about this comment
By the way with respect to ghettos. Go to any South American country (indeed Jamaica as well from what I have been told) and you will find the odd community full of 2nd and 3rd generation germans (and more). For some reason, the local populations see them more as an oddity than a threat. Go figure.
Complain about this comment
Re 113 & 114
Unfortunately both of you do what many others have been doing lately, which is ignoring (on purpose?) the ILLEGAL prefix to the word immigrant. Most Europeans are tolerant to immigrants, but to the ones that are here to work, appreciate their host society and do not clash with it. This is why CONTROLLED IMMIGRATION WORKS. You need to show proof of who you are, proof that you are not a criminal and that you have something to offer to your host country in order to be admitted. You need to show proof that you are working in order to be able to extend your stay. You should not be able to reap social benefits with a couple of months work history. You definitely should not be able to get a pension in your host country unless you have paid in as much as the locals into the system. Don't like it? Stay where you are. I am sorry to be so "cruel" but nobody invited them. Do you honestly think that Europe can absorb all the people that wish to move here?
I bring Greece as an example because this is where I lived and this is what I saw every single day. Whole parts of the city being inaccessible to Greeks anymore, every traffic light junction having 5-10 people just sitting around cleaning and begging (and spitting you and harrassing women if you dare to give them below 50 cents). Being an immigrant myself now in the US, I had to go through the proper channels, I didn't just arrive one day here and DEMANDED to be granted legal status.
So, back to my point, right now in Greece there are around 500,000 illegal immigrants give or take. That is close to 5% of the total population - and that is ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. You do realize that you cannot just give legal status* to so many people that cannot be absorbed for employment. This number can and will also cause huge social problems. This is exactly what Italy is facing now. What they should do is load them up and send them their way. They came from a country that just had a revolution and is a step closer towards democracy. Are they kidding us?
*Actually if you think about it, the best thing that we can do right now is give them legal status. Most of them are in limbo here and once they get that they will move on to other countries, they are not stupid, they do know that there are no jobs to be found here and that Greece is already a mess without their presence. So, instead of b**ching that we are not doing enough - like building 1 300-room welcoming centre per day aparently - the EU should be thanking us that we have accepted to turn our cities into the continent's holding cell for illegal immigrants.
Complain about this comment
115 & 116
With respect to ghettos, yes they are not all that bad. I mean, a Chinatown is a cool place to be, little Tokyo is also very nice to walk through. Trust me I live in LA now, I don't mind the cultural traits of each neighborhood I am in. I have also lived in Essex, UK, so I know that housing estates with drunk and agressive/abusive whites.
I am talking about the ghettos I see in my country (and all that I am talking about is from my experience, I detest the press and their propaganda). Walking through a neighborhood where people squat in groups of 20 in small apartments, where TB is rampant and although treatment is offered for free it is not accepted, where after sunset you cannot go through even with your car, this is not a charmful ghetto. Plus, we never had to deal with that sort of thing in Greece until recently and we do not like it one bit. Why should it be forced down our throat if we do not want to have it, don't we have a choice as citizens of this country?
1st generation is not necessarily the problem, it is the illegal status, the lack of language skills and the lack of assimilation - take a look at what I said about TB, it is known that many of them carry disease, treatment is offered but they do not accept it, they either don't care or they do not trust our doctors. Either way, they have to accept that this is not a slum of S.Asia but a district of Athens and they cannot live in the same conditions (or turn the area into a slum cause that is what they are used to). As for working, yes, they can work but when there is no work around (this is Greece btw) then they turn to crime and/or the black economy. How exactly does that help demographic problems or helps the society as a whole?
Where you completely lose your argument is when you compare what I am saying to a closed community of 3rd generation Germans living in Jamaica. If you cannot see the difference between what is happening to Europe and that, then I don't know what else to say. What is next, bringing up the British expats in Costa del Sol?
Complain about this comment
#117 - ptsa
"Unfortunately both of you do what many others have been doing lately, which is ignoring (on purpose?) the ILLEGAL prefix to the word immigrant".
Am I? How very perceptive. You must be a mind reader. Pity it is not my mind you are reading.
I am very much aware of the distinction between legal and illegal immigration and legal status will undoubtedly be a consideration when deciding what to do with each individual case. The fact remains that we are dealing with human beings and if one fetches up on a beach near you, you can hardly ask for a visa or work permit and, if one is not forthcoming, drive them back into the sea.
As "so many have been doing lately", you are taking refuge in legal niceties which fit nicely into you view of the world but have nothing to do with the reality on the ground.
Complain about this comment
#118 - ptsa
I would have expected a Greek to understand better than anyone. You have extensive land borders with non-Schengen countries but also huge stretches of coast line. If someone arrives at a land border crossing, its really very simple - no, you cannot come in. If those borders are porous, you have an enforcement problem. But seaborne illegals are different. Coastal borders re notoriously difficult to police and you do not have the luxury of saying 'go back from whence you came'. This is not a matter of principle. Its common sense.
Complain about this comment
@ #113
I would, however the "Pillage and Plunder for Fun and Profit" buisness has been regulated to the point where it is the exclusive trade of black economy ship folk (if that is the politically correct term for such dregs now a days) and certain fancy types with more chips than sense (if that is the politically correct term for such dregs now a days).
@ #114/115
There seems to be confusion between "ghetto" (slum), "ghetto" (ethnic community), and "ghetto" (ethnic slum)... just saying...
Complain about this comment
@110 ThrenodioII
Thanks for the comments.
I agree with your first argument concerning the well known facts about the failure of the monetary policy of Reagan’s & Thatcher’s administrations. I agree also with you that the lack of good planning in the educational system of many democracies resulted in a disproportional demand for highly skilled and less skilled engineers/workers which was another substantial reason for the unemployment of many highly educated young people. Consequently, the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the huge human flow of youngsters in the early 90s simply worsened even more the fate of the so called lost generation.
Well that’s clear. Europe can not sustain another massive exodus of people; moreover that they are not prepared to share the cultural traditions of our nations.
I still hesitate over your assessment of Gorbatchev’s contribution to what happened here after 1989. My firm believe is that the result is more beneficial than negative both for the East and the West. The continent is more stable, I mean politically. There still is a chance to reconstruct old Europe given the fact that an economic/political entity like the EU seems to be the unique alternative for a successful coexistence for all of us. If there were not Gorbatchev, we would have been still divided ideologically, politically, economically. Thanks Lord, the crushing majority of us are enough educated to share the universal values, a fact, that differs us from the people who are landing at this very moment Lampedusa Island.
Complain about this comment
119. At 8:07pm on 18 Feb 2011, threnodio_II wrote:
#117 - ptsa
"Unfortunately both of you do what many others have been doing lately, which is ignoring (on purpose?) the ILLEGAL prefix to the word immigrant".
Am I? How very perceptive. You must be a mind reader. Pity it is not my mind you are reading.
---
Well of course you are, if you are just using the word immigrant without the ILLEGAL or LEGAL prefix to define two different things and then tell us how people in Europe love their presence. This is where the European attitude changes dramatically, its between legal and illegal presence. Also, you must also be a mind reader of all Europeans when you state that most are "very" tolerant of the immigrant community. This is always the talk of the people that do not live in fear of going around their neighbourhood at night, if its not in your face then its not your problem and you can concentrate on the philosophical and humanitarian aspect of the discussion.
I am very much aware of the distinction between legal and illegal immigration and legal status will undoubtedly be a consideration when deciding what to do with each individual case. The fact remains that we are dealing with human beings and if one fetches up on a beach near you, you can hardly ask for a visa or work permit and, if one is not forthcoming, drive them back into the sea.
----
OK if one fetches up on the sea you assist him etc etc. What do you do when thousands do that? And, sure you can send them back. What are you going to do with them? Oh I see, have them take over public buildings by force and demand to be given legal status. So, not only do these people enter a country ILLEGALLY, then they have the audacity to have proper "demands" while occupying public property. And you dont have to drive them to the sea and drown them, the coast guard has boats you know, just reverse the whole situation. I am sure Turkey would not mind taking back the people that it has indirectly loaded to us.
As "so many have been doing lately", you are taking refuge in legal niceties which fit nicely into you view of the world but have nothing to do with the reality on the ground.
----
Right, and what would that reality be? What is the problem with me, as a citizen of a country, not wanting it to be overran by people that have nothing to offer to me or my society? What do you suggest then? Can you be more specific?
And yes, there is this thing called the LAW, whether you like it or not is has to be obeyed. You talk about reality on the ground, what about someone who is not able to afford food in his own country because he lost his job and has been unemployed for months? Is he allowed to steal (or kill and then steal) just because this is the reality on the ground? Shouldn't he be prosecuted just because this is a legal nicety that fits "some" peoples views? Seriously?
#118 - ptsa
I would have expected a Greek to understand better than anyone. You have extensive land borders with non-Schengen countries but also huge stretches of coast line. If someone arrives at a land border crossing, its really very simple - no, you cannot come in. If those borders are porous, you have an enforcement problem. But seaborne illegals are different. Coastal borders re notoriously difficult to police and you do not have the luxury of saying 'go back from whence you came'. This is not a matter of principle. Its common sense.
-----
Well, Italians were very successful at stopping the sea border invasions, they ordered the navy/coast guard to shoot any vessels carrying illegal immigrants, guess what, it worked like a charm. I don't know why it is not common sense for you to have those people immediately sent back because a)thats what I would expect if I tried to pull a stunt like that in any other country, including theirs and b)why is it better to just allow them to roam free in the country? And we Greeks understand, although on a much much lower scale, we have been dealing with this for decades but now it is just too much. You either take a tough stance and let those people know that this will not be tolerated or you will have the word going around that you can go through Greece if you want to come illegally in the EU. It is just that simple.
As for the land borders, you as well as most of the EU do not realize that a country of 10m people cannot stop over 300 people crossing the border at various entry points. We cannot build a new hotel-size "welcoming centre" every single day to accomodate those 300 people a day. Even FRONTEX was overwhelmed by the size of the problems we face at our border. We are planning to build a wall, it worked for the Spanish, maybe it will work for us too.
And after reading that, before you start telling me how sobbing the reality "on the ground" is, walk the walk before you talk the talk, next time you see an illegal immigrant (hell, even a homeless from the streets will do for the principle), tell them that it is ok for them to come into your house uninvited at any point, they can also go through your fridge and things and of course come back whenever they feel like it, because the "reality on the ground" is terrible for them. This is what is being suggested but in a larger scale, the uncontrolled admission of people in our countries, masked by a debateable demographics crisis solution that will end up being forced on us.
Complain about this comment
The Italians won't be concerned really ... 'they're' all coming here to the UK!
5,000 is peanuts in terms of numbers... there are twice as many immigrant numbers than that as currently camped in Northern France ... waiting for the next opportunity to invade the UK ...
Should the UK now be asking for 'help'
Complain about this comment
#123 ptsa wrote-
"-- (hell, even a homeless from the streets will do for the principle), tell them that it is ok for them to come into your house uninvited at any point, they can also go through your fridge and things and of course come back whenever they feel like it, because the "reality on the ground" is terrible for them. This is what is being suggested but in a larger scale, the uncontrolled admission of people in our countries, masked by a debateable demographics crisis solution that will end up being forced on us."
--- Now, lets not get carried away down THAT principle road ?
Complain about this comment
If Europeans are unable to populate their own countries -- then what is wrong with accepting ALL those who are ?
The Nationalism expressed by some contributors over many topics is limited to war and power -- when many countries in fact require a different (but more pleasurable) solution to demographic deficiencies.
-- show Nationalism where it really matters !
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS