An inconvenient German fact for the refugee haters

[Derec]

I wonder how we can determine if an immigrant is productive before he's allowed to immigrate and then produce anything?

You can selectively choose whom you let immigrate based on their background. Instead of taking everybody who shows up at your border with no questions asked and so you end up taking, for example, a guy who almost killed a woman in Greece.
Afghan migrant accused of killing Freiburg student admits to lying about age

Hussein K. also disclosed other details of his identity that had until Tuesday remained unclear. The young migrant was born and raised in Afghanistan but moved to Iran at age 13. After "problems with the police," he then fled to Turkey, before moving on to Greece and finally Germany.[..]The young migrant is alleged to have drowned Maria L. by laying her unconscious body in the Dreisam river. He was arrested in December last year after DNA evidence and video footage near the scene linked him to the crime.[..]The case sparked nationwide debate over Germany's migration policy. Hussein K. arrived in Germany during the height of the migrant crisis in the autumn of 2015, a year before he is alleged to have killed the young student. Arriving without documents, he was allowed to register as an unaccompanied minor.[..]However, following his arrest in December in connection with the murder, it emerged that Hussein K. had previously been convicted in Greece for almost killing a woman by pushing her off a cliff. Despite being sentenced to 10 years, he was released after just over a year in order to make space in Greece's crowded prisons.

Ah yes, the lying about being a minor is also very widespread among those mass migrants. Note also that he arrived in 2015, when Merkel allowed a million mass migrants to come to Germany without checking their backgrounds or placing any restrictions on them.

 

[barbos]

Germany recorded an almost 10 per cent drop in crime last year to its lowest level since the early 1990s despite perceptions that the arrival of more than a million asylum seekers would lead to a rise in offences.

…Overall, violent crime was down by 1.7 per cent last year, the Interior Ministry said

Among all non-German suspects, rape and serious sexual assault fell last year to 2,421 cases from 2,512 in 2016. Overall crime reported fell by 9.6 per cent to its lowest level since 1992.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...after-crime-rate-in-germany-plunges-g8hvhfpb0

Where is all the crime that was predicted by the anti immigration/refugee crowd?

From the article:

In fact crimes committed by immigrants from outside the EU fell sharply, the government said, mainly because of a dramatic cut in asylum seekers crossing the border illegally

So why refugee haters should be inconvenienced again?

 

[laughing dog]

So why refugee haters should be inconvenienced again?

Haters don't need no stinking facts to perpetuate their hate. Their hate boners are self-perpetuating.

 

[Underseer]

Then we should keep the immigrants and get rid of conservatives.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-now-red-states-want-even-more/?noredirect=on

What we should do and what we can do are two different things. But I am all having more incentives to produce and less incentives to consume the production of others, if that's what you're advocating.

Are you saying it's unreasonable to deport all the conservatives despite the fact that we can show most of them take more than they give to society?

Why is that unreasonable?

Would it help if I pointed out multiple incidents of conservative terrorism?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Would it help if I pointed out multiple incidents of conservative terrorism?

Perhaps it would help things if you spammed the thread with multiple semi-related images of conservatives who look scary and dangerous.

 

[James Brown]

I wonder how we can determine if an immigrant is productive before he's allowed to immigrate and then produce anything?

You can selectively choose whom you let immigrate based on their background.

Doesn't that create a chicken/egg problem? A country will only accept 'productive' immigrants, but those are the people least likely to leave their home country because they are productive and prosperous. People who are naturally seeking a better life elsewhere are, by definition, leaving a worse life behind.

And of course, for a refugee, it's even more difficult to be productive back home when, for example, your country is locked in civil war, or is ruled by thugs, etc. And in discussions like these, issues concerning immigrants and refugees tend to be interchanged, further confusing the issue.

 

[dismal]

Then we should keep the immigrants and get rid of conservatives.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-now-red-states-want-even-more/?noredirect=on

What we should do and what we can do are two different things. But I am all having more incentives to produce and less incentives to consume the production of others, if that's what you're advocating.

Are you saying it's unreasonable to deport all the conservatives despite the fact that we can show most of them take more than they give to society?

Why is that unreasonable?

Would it help if I pointed out multiple incidents of conservative terrorism?

It's generally unreasonable to deport citizens of your own country. If you have evidence they have committed some crime, then you should perhaps focus on convicting them.

If you are suggesting we reduce or eliminate policies that dis-incent people producing things and incent people not producing things, I'm right there with you, whether the people in question are conservatives or immigrants.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Germany recorded an almost 10 per cent drop in crime last year to its lowest level since the early 1990s despite perceptions that the arrival of more than a million asylum seekers would lead to a rise in offences.

…Overall, violent crime was down by 1.7 per cent last year, the Interior Ministry said

Among all non-German suspects, rape and serious sexual assault fell last year to 2,421 cases from 2,512 in 2016. Overall crime reported fell by 9.6 per cent to its lowest level since 1992.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...after-crime-rate-in-germany-plunges-g8hvhfpb0

Where is all the crime that was predicted by the anti immigration/refugee crowd?

But how much of this is a lack of reporting?

 

[Harry Bosch]

Yea, it's hard to understand. Immigration is also better for the economy. The children of immigrants are the most successful group in the US in almost all measures. Sure they tend to vote democratic, but that's only because the republicans treat them so badly.

I'm happy to accept that productive immigrants are a benefit to a society. I can't imagine why your blanket statement would be true. If your society imports someone who consumes more than they produce, your society will be worse off.

If the US closed off all immigration the way your crazy leader wants, we'd enter into a no-growth economy similar to what is occurring in Japan right now. The biggest drag on our economy is that we don't have enough trained workers. Secondly, the extra workers that come in become consumers themselves. We do not have enough workers to pay all the support that is needed for the retiring baby boomers. So, yes, there is a cost to first generation immigrants in the US, but their decendants more than pay for themselves:

From the NY Times:

For the 2011-2013 period, the net cost to state and local budgets of first generation adults is, on average, about $1,600 each. In contrast, second and third-plus generation adults create a net positive of about $1,700 and $1,300 each, respectively, to state and local budgets. These estimates imply that the total annual fiscal impact of first generation adults and their dependents, averaged across 2011-13, is a cost of $57.4 billion, while second and third-plus generation adults create a benefit of $30.5 billion and $223.8 billion, respectively.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/...s/what-does-immigration-actually-cost-us.html

 

[dismal]

Yea, it's hard to understand. Immigration is also better for the economy. The children of immigrants are the most successful group in the US in almost all measures. Sure they tend to vote democratic, but that's only because the republicans treat them so badly.

I'm happy to accept that productive immigrants are a benefit to a society. I can't imagine why your blanket statement would be true. If your society imports someone who consumes more than they produce, your society will be worse off.

If the US closed off all immigration the way your crazy leader wants, we'd enter into a no-growth economy similar to what is occurring in Japan right now. The biggest drag on our economy is that we don't have enough trained workers. Secondly, the extra workers that come in become consumers themselves. We do not have enough workers to pay all the support that is needed for the retiring baby boomers. So, yes, there is a cost to first generation immigrants in the US, but their decendants more than pay for themselves:

From the NY Times:

For the 2011-2013 period, the net cost to state and local budgets of first generation adults is, on average, about $1,600 each. In contrast, second and third-plus generation adults create a net positive of about $1,700 and $1,300 each, respectively, to state and local budgets. These estimates imply that the total annual fiscal impact of first generation adults and their dependents, averaged across 2011-13, is a cost of $57.4 billion, while second and third-plus generation adults create a benefit of $30.5 billion and $223.8 billion, respectively.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/...s/what-does-immigration-actually-cost-us.html

Growth? I care about per capita growth. Importing people who produce less than they consume aren't going to help that.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

If the US closed off all immigration the way your crazy leader wants, we'd enter into a no-growth economy similar to what is occurring in Japan right now. The biggest drag on our economy is that we don't have enough trained workers. Secondly, the extra workers that come in become consumers themselves. We do not have enough workers to pay all the support that is needed for the retiring baby boomers. So, yes, there is a cost to first generation immigrants in the US, but their decendants more than pay for themselves:

From the NY Times:

For the 2011-2013 period, the net cost to state and local budgets of first generation adults is, on average, about $1,600 each. In contrast, second and third-plus generation adults create a net positive of about $1,700 and $1,300 each, respectively, to state and local budgets. These estimates imply that the total annual fiscal impact of first generation adults and their dependents, averaged across 2011-13, is a cost of $57.4 billion, while second and third-plus generation adults create a benefit of $30.5 billion and $223.8 billion, respectively.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/...s/what-does-immigration-actually-cost-us.html

Growth? I care about per capita growth. Importing people who produce less than they consume aren't going to help that.

? What part of a net benefit of $196.9 Billion over a two year period don’t you understand?

 

[Jokodo]

Germany recorded an almost 10 per cent drop in crime last year to its lowest level since the early 1990s despite perceptions that the arrival of more than a million asylum seekers would lead to a rise in offences.

…Overall, violent crime was down by 1.7 per cent last year, the Interior Ministry said

Among all non-German suspects, rape and serious sexual assault fell last year to 2,421 cases from 2,512 in 2016. Overall crime reported fell by 9.6 per cent to its lowest level since 1992.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...after-crime-rate-in-germany-plunges-g8hvhfpb0

Where is all the crime that was predicted by the anti immigration/refugee crowd?

But how much of this is a lack of reporting?

0. Crimes by refugees are significantly overreported.

This was particularly notable in May 2016, when a mentally deranged man from Kenya killed a market tender preparing her booth Wednesday the early in the morning in Vienna. He killed her with an iron bar, in public. National news were full about this case.

Meanwhile, a couple months earlier, in February of the same year, an Austrian man in a suburb of Linz had killed a couple, apparently neighbours he had been quarreling with - with an iron bar, in public, very parallel except that he did it in full possession of his mental capabilities. This case was barely reported outside of local newspapers until *after* the case in Vienna, when some people started to draw parallels.

Contemporary reports on both cases (German):
https://derstandard.at/2000036279713/Frau-in-Wien-Ottakring-mit-Eisenstange-getoetet
https://derstandard.at/2000031043508/Leonding-Ehepaar-von-Nachbar-mit-Eisenstange-niedergeschlagen

ETA: Until minutes ago when I googled original reports of both cases, I actually thought they were in the same week because I heard of them in the same week, that's how low-profile the case involving an Austrian was in the media.

 

[coloradoatheist]

But how much of this is a lack of reporting?

0. Crimes by refugees are significantly overreported.

This was particularly notable in May 2016, when a mentally deranged man from Kenya killed a market tender preparing her booth Wednesday the early in the morning in Vienna. He killed her with an iron bar, in public. National news were full about this case.

Meanwhile, a couple months earlier, in February of the same year, an Austrian man in a suburb of Linz had killed a couple, apparently neighbours he had been quarreling with - with an iron bar, in public, very parallel except that he did it in full possession of his mental capabilities. This case was barely reported outside of local newspapers until *after* the case in Vienna, when some people started to draw parallels.

Contemporary reports on both cases (German):
https://derstandard.at/2000036279713/Frau-in-Wien-Ottakring-mit-Eisenstange-getoetet
https://derstandard.at/2000031043508/Leonding-Ehepaar-von-Nachbar-mit-Eisenstange-niedergeschlagen

ETA: Until minutes ago when I googled original reports of both cases, I actually thought they were in the same week because I heard of them in the same week, that's how low-profile the case involving an Austrian was in the media.

How does that follow from one anecdote? Unfortunately we don't know because dismal had the article that multiple town's reports weren't included in the statistics.

 

[arkirk]

So we are to measure our fellow men in terms of how well they serve our purposes? There is no reason to expect that a refugee from a country your country is bombing, sanctioning, and perhaps invading should be "productive" for you. What a selfish extension of the original sin of fucking with these countries in the first place. They had NO CONTROL over what your country did in their country. What you did created in their lives the need to flee and be a refugee. Now you want to subject these victims to a productivity test. What utter bullshit!

 

[Elixir]

This statistic doesn't address the rate at which immigrants commit crimes compared to the national average. Do they report that?

Relevance? The refugee wave, columinating in 2017, did not lead to some spike in crime as the haters predicted. Crime is at its lowest since 1992.

Relevance? If you're trying to make statements about immigrants and crime what could be more relevant than the crime rate among immigrants?

Why would you talk about broad national trends that probably have nothing to do with immigrants or cherrypick stats?

If immigrants are committing crimes at 2X (or 0.5X) the national average rate then they are in fact hurting (helping) the crime stats, whether it is masked by other factors or not.

Why bother? In the US, it is shown that immigrants commit FEWER crimes than the "natives", and illegal border crossings are at low ebb. What has that done to mitigate the morons' cries "BUILD THAT WALL!"?
Nothing. Anti-immigrant bigots are immune to reason.

 

[Underseer]

Immigrants contribute more to the economy than they take in government services.

Conservatives on average take more from the government than they pay in taxes.

Also, many conservatives commit acts of terrorism, therefore according to conservative logic we can treat them all as terrorists.

By conservative/libertarian logic, we are now justified in deporting all the rightists.

 

[ronburgundy]

The stats show that overall crime is down, yet asylum seekers are more than twice as likely to commit violent crimes as German citizens, and thus crime is still higher in areas with a large influx of migrants. However, that difference appears to be mostly a byproduct of young males between 14 and 30 (who generally commit most crimes everywhere), comprise 3 times more of the migrant population than the overall German population.

Note that much of the reported 10% drop in overall crime since 2016 was "mainly because of a dramatic cut in asylum seekers crossing the border illegally." IOW, it isn't that migrants are not committing crime once in Germany, but mostly that the wave of refugees in 2015 and 2016 had largely stopped, so in 2017 there were far fewer committing the "crime" of entering Germany illegally in the first place.

When it comes to violent crime, 2017 saw a drop of only 2.4% which is is less than half the 6.7% increase that occurred the year before.
Plus, violent crime rates had been falling sharply from 2007 to 2014, but then rose significantly when the large wave of migrants began to arrive in 2015. In one of the provinces that actually keep records of the citizenship and nation of origin status of crime convicts and victims, Lower Saxony, 92% of the increase in violent crime from 2014 to 2016 was due to the fact that asylum seekers went from committing only 4.3% of the crime in 2014 to 13% of the crime in 2016, despite still only representing 2% of the provinces population in 2016 (making then 6 times more likely to commit a violent crime than other residents). Note that Lower Saxony is an area where a high % of refugees and migrants went in the last few years, so it better reflects their impact than national level stats.

None of the OP stats suggest this much higher violent crime rates among migrants and asylum seekers has magically changed in the last year. Rather, the asylum seekers are still committing way more than their share of crimes and increasing crime more than it would be without them, but their numbers relative to the total population is still too small to reverse the overall national level long term trend of decreasing crime in Germany. And just to reiterate, its more about young males who commit most crimes being over-represented among the migrants than about their nationality, religion, etc..

Some articles that deal with this can be found here and here.

And for those who can read German, here is a detailed statistical analysis.

 

[Bomb#20]

I think the real question people should be asking is why the German government is lying and underreporting all the constant crimes these immigrants are committing every day.

This statistics this article refers to speak to national trends. My guess is the immigrants are a pretty small percentage of the population. Immigrants could be committing crimes well in excess of (or well below) the national average.

Well, it's nice of the native German people to have been extra polite and commit less crimes in order to skew the numbers and let all of the crimes by these immigrants go under the radar. That's a sign of a caring and respectful host.

It's not a matter of niceness or politeness. The U.S. experienced a similar decline in crime rates back in the 1990s, about 20 years after we legalized abortion. Germany legalized abortion about 20 years after we did. And here we are, about another 20 years later, and the native German people have falling crime rates. Who'da thunk?

 

[Lumpenproletariat]

Young males are the problem group, rather than immigrants/refugees.

Everyone agrees that it's mainly young males who commit the crimes, regardless of citizenship/immigrant status.

So, with today's technology, why not implant a monitoring device onto most males (including citizens), those under 30 or 40, all the refugee males, the ex-cons, and some other categories. Those who want to be productive and non-violent will choose to participate in the society, while those planning to commit crimes will go elsewhere rather than let themselves be implanted with the device.

Little need to worry whether they are natives or immigrants.

Most important --- WE NEED THE CHEAP LABOR! the increased competition benefits all consumers.

Even if the average GDP per capita decreases from the increased immigration, the country is really made more prosperous, because everyone is made better off. No one's living standard decreases. Rather, some poor immigrants enter, bringing down the average, but still they and those already in the country are all made better off.

How can the country be worse off if everyone in it is being made better off?

 

[bilby]

Everyone agrees that it's mainly young males who commit the crimes, regardless of citizenship/immigrant status.

So, with today's technology, why not implant a monitoring device onto most males (including citizens), those under 30 or 40, all the refugee males, the ex-cons, and some other categories. Those who want to be productive and non-violent will choose to participate in the society, while those planning to commit crimes will go elsewhere rather than let themselves be implanted with the device.

Little need to worry whether they are natives or immigrants.

Most important --- WE NEED THE CHEAP LABOR! the increased competition benefits all consumers.

Even if the average GDP per capita decreases from the increased immigration, the country is really made more prosperous, because everyone is made better off. No one's living standard decreases. Rather, some poor immigrants enter, bringing down the average, but still they and those already in the country are all made better off.

How can the country be worse off if everyone in it is being made better off?

You have a very unusual definition of 'better off' when it includes 'implanted with a tracking chip'.

That sounds not so much like being 'better off' and more like being 'the victim of a dystopian nightmare from which an escape by violent revolution would be the morally reasonable choice'.

Why is it that people who claim to be libertarians so often propose totalitarianism? In my mind, these should be diametrically opposite positions.

When your idea of freedom demands the implantation of tracking chips in people, you probably haven't got clue one what 'freedom' even means.