Europe submits voluntarily

[barbos]

I think 1.6 versus 8.1 is a fertility rate not birth rate. But I doubt muslims in any country have 8.1 fertility rate. Maybe some have 4 but 8 is just impossible.
OK
google says Niger is 7.46
and Palestina 3.95

 

[Derec]

Oh crap. My boss is on vacation in Europe right now. Should I try to warn him about the impending apocalypse? Or is it already too late?

This is a long term problem for Europe, but thanks for the strawman.

 

[ideologyhunter]

And anyway, there's an elegantly simple solution: honorary French citizenship for the Donald. You just won't believe how great he'll be at solving the problem.

 

[Derec]

Its a matter of Maths.
Take a European population with 15% Muslims . Then compare a 1.6 to an 8.1 birth rate. Islam is also fast growing amongst Europeans. I prefer Halal beef by the way.

You prefer your beef with extra cruelty? Also, you can't get bacon from beef. Finally, Islam doesn't allow alcohol so all those European beers, wines and spirits might be a thing of the past by the end of the century, unless Europeans do something about it.

If however islam in Europe adopts and retains the culture of its host countries I think many of our civil rights will remain intact.

Experience with Muslims already in Europe shows that to be quite unrealistic.
There is a thread on here describing Kim Davis, the county clerk from Kentucky, as 'theocratic ruler'. Yet, prospect of islamic theocracy, which would make Kim Davis look like Richard Dawkins, is not seen as a threat by the Left. What is it with the faux-liberal blind spot when it comes to Islam?

So pretty soon the host citizens will be a minority.

And why should Europe not fight against that?

 

[Derec]

Ive worked for quite a few years in Muslim countries. Its not a problem. I get on with Arabs.

Sharia law is a problem. Islamic terrorism is a problem.

I have Palestinian friends.

Do you also support Palestinian terrorism?

The problem for Europe is the maths. We have a low birth rate compared to Muslims, especially those in Europe. Europe is very likely to become Muslim but if like Christianity it reforms and allows a secular system there would not be too much to worry about.

There is obviously much to worry about. Islam is getting more theocratic, not less so. Just look at IS. And speaking of them, how many IS terrorists are streaming into Europe hiding among refugees and other "migrants"?

If you want to see really racist immigration policies get a look at those in the UAE

Why aren't UAW and other Muslim counties taking in their Muslim brethren?

 

[Derec]

Irrational fear of the other.

No, a quite rational fear of a foreign culture that has shown itself incompatible with secular values and liberal democracy.

European values should not be a suicide pact! Europe needs to learn that quickly or perish.

 

[dystopian]

Not all of these "migrants" are actual refugees.

Irrelevant.

And there should be a way to help people fleeing wars without giving away Europe's future.

Giving asylum to refugees is not giving away our future. Stop being a dramaqueen.

Why can't the Muslim world do more to take in these people?

It *does*. Europe is not actually where most of the refugees are ending up; that's just the story certain media want you to believe.

Europe has taken in only around a 150,000 Syrian refugees in total. Compare that to Lebanon, a tiny country of just over 10,000km2 that has taken in more than 1,2 million refugees.

Why can't more of them stay in Turkey, where they are coming through anyway?

The majority of them *are* in fact staying in Turkey. Turkey has taken in 2 million refugees; the numbers going on through to Europe represent only a minority of that 2 million.

Why can't Saudi Arabia, which is both rich, Muslim and has a lot of empty space, take a few hundred thousand of their fellow Muslims?

A valid question but one that is irrelevant to our own moral duty to help.

Actually, Muslims are no longer a tiny minority in Europe.

No, actually, they ARE still a tiny minority. I already stated the figures they represent in this thread. Muslims make up only 3.2% of the European Union's population. That IS a tiny minority.

and their numbers are increasing.

It's actually rather questionable that they are. For instance, in the Netherlands the number of muslims has actually gone DOWN every year since 2004. Muslims reached a height of 944.000 people in 2004, whereas today there are 825.000 of them.

You're relying on the divergence between their birth rates and ours, but as already shown the divergence isn't that great (and the gap is narrowing in any case); and you're not considering secularisation.

And even when they are a minority there are problems with violence/terrorism,

Woohoo, profiling!

with demands for Sharia law etc. This will only get worse by letting hundreds of thousands of more Muslims in.

Woohoo, bigotry!

 

[laughing dog]

Oh crap. My boss is on vacation in Europe right now. Should I try to warn him about the impending apocalypse? Or is it already too late?

This is a long term problem for Europe, but thanks for the strawman.

LOL - "The Islamization of Europe" is the straw man.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I think 1.6 versus 8.1 is a fertility rate not birth rate. But I doubt muslims in any country have 8.1 fertility rate. Maybe some have 4 but 8 is just impossible.

The figures are my error.
The problem is the quantities of people coming in and financial resources. Criminals are selling Europe to impoverished peoples and putting them in unsafe boats. The media plays this up as our the Europeans fault. The more that make it here, means more will come.

. We don't have the finances, to cope. I am currently in Italy It has an unemployment rate of around 12 per cent per some sources. Here is one
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/italy/unemployment-rate Many of the migrants are gathering again around Milan Central station. Maybe just a few hundred. A lot sit on the road side or the grass and some have a few beers to pass the time.
Wages in Italy are generally quite low and taxation is high. A lot of Italians live at home.
Even though immigrants are getting just €34.60 a day plus lunch packs to live on which isn't much the Italians cannot really afford this. If people wish to donate voluntarily that's not a problem.

 

[dystopian]

Wages in Italy are generally quite low and taxation is high. A lot of Italians live at home.
Even though immigrants are getting just €34.60 a day plus lunch packs to live on which isn't much the Italians cannot really afford this. If people wish to donate voluntarily that's not a problem.

So, you claim they can't afford it... but suddenly if they do voluntary donation it wouldn't be a problem? If voluntary donation is not a problem, then obviously they *can* afford it; you just don't think they should.

 

[SimpleDon]

And anyway, there's an elegantly simple solution: honorary French citizenship for the Donald. You just won't believe how great he'll be at solving the problem.

Time is wasting to start building the wall in Europe!

 

[SimpleDon]

The solution is obvious. There is still a lot of room left in Guantanamo.

 

[Draconis]

I think we are heading for trouble in Europe one way or another anyway, by the means of demographics.

The far-right extremists seem to gathering their strength again. They seem to view governments as either ineffectual or collaborative with the Islamification process and thus will attempt to deal with the problem themselves. I seem to remember the police busting a terrorist attack aimed at Mosques and Islamic leaders a few months ago in Germany. One day they will succeed, and once that happens, I fear the result.

I wonder if the next Adolf Hitler has been born yet? This time his target might not be Jews.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Wages in Italy are generally quite low and taxation is high. A lot of Italians live at home.
Even though immigrants are getting just €34.60 a day plus lunch packs to live on which isn't much the Italians cannot really afford this. If people wish to donate voluntarily that's not a problem.

So, you claim they can't afford it... but suddenly if they do voluntary donation it wouldn't be a problem? If voluntary donation is not a problem, then obviously they *can* afford it; you just don't think they should.

Those who want to donate can and those who do not don't have to.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Sharia law is a problem. Islamic terrorism is a problem.

I have Palestinian friends.

Do you also support Palestinian terrorism?

The problem for Europe is the maths. We have a low birth rate compared to Muslims, especially those in Europe. Europe is very likely to become Muslim but if like Christianity it reforms and allows a secular system there would not be too much to worry about.

There is obviously much to worry about. Islam is getting more theocratic, not less so. Just look at IS. And speaking of them, how many IS terrorists are streaming into Europe hiding among refugees and other "migrants"?

If you want to see really racist immigration policies get a look at those in the UAE

Why aren't UAW and other Muslim counties taking in their Muslim brethren?

In a war with both sides killing each other including civilians there are not real distinctions between the good guys and bad guys. Palestinians have been evicted from their homes many of whom lived there for thousands of years.
No matter which way an animal goes, it’s not very pleasant for the animal. Stunning is not at all kind to the animals. Here is a modern slaughterhouse but there is abuse in all systems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuW4lwa6FRI
You can get bacon from beef and from turkeys. Also you can get turkey ham. Turkey ham and beef contain less fat than pork bacon. I’ve tried a beef burger with crispy beef bacon at Burger King in the Abu Dhabi Mall and it tasted pretty good.
Though I am based in Abu Dhabi, when I visit my employer
You can also get alcohol in hotels and for non Muslims in Abu Dhabi special stores are available I don’t drink so it doesn’t matter. Though it is freely available it is also illegal. Eact month a few locals are given 80 lashes for alcohol consumption and drunken and disorderly behaviour. For foreigners its generally ok unless they get caught misbehaving.
The Veil seems to be disappearing pretty fast but the Hijab is generally worn. When they travel abroad most local women from Abu Dhabi are wearing entirely Western clothing.
The Europeans vote for governments who invite mass immigration. To reverse it means voting for a party that will reverse the trend. I would like to see the figures cut down considerably but what the Europeans vote for is what they get.

Muslim countries don't take many people in because they have strict laws and border controls. Seriously very few would seek asylum in Saudi Arabia. This was given to Idi Amin some years ago.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Irrelevant.

And there should be a way to help people fleeing wars without giving away Europe's future.

Giving asylum to refugees is not giving away our future. Stop being a dramaqueen.

Why can't the Muslim world do more to take in these people?

It *does*. Europe is not actually where most of the refugees are ending up; that's just the story certain media want you to believe.

Europe has taken in only around a 150,000 Syrian refugees in total. Compare that to Lebanon, a tiny country of just over 10,000km2 that has taken in more than 1,2 million refugees.

Why can't more of them stay in Turkey, where they are coming through anyway?

The majority of them *are* in fact staying in Turkey. Turkey has taken in 2 million refugees; the numbers going on through to Europe represent only a minority of that 2 million.

Why can't Saudi Arabia, which is both rich, Muslim and has a lot of empty space, take a few hundred thousand of their fellow Muslims?

A valid question but one that is irrelevant to our own moral duty to help.

Actually, Muslims are no longer a tiny minority in Europe.

No, actually, they ARE still a tiny minority. I already stated the figures they represent in this thread. Muslims make up only 3.2% of the European Union's population. That IS a tiny minority.

and their numbers are increasing.

It's actually rather questionable that they are. For instance, in the Netherlands the number of muslims has actually gone DOWN every year since 2004. Muslims reached a height of 944.000 people in 2004, whereas today there are 825.000 of them.

You're relying on the divergence between their birth rates and ours, but as already shown the divergence isn't that great (and the gap is narrowing in any case); and you're not considering secularisation.

And even when they are a minority there are problems with violence/terrorism,

Woohoo, profiling!

with demands for Sharia law etc. This will only get worse by letting hundreds of thousands of more Muslims in.

Woohoo, bigotry!

Apologies I gave some wrong figures so unfortunately some are quoting these. Saudi has financial resources and really why does not take more in. Since the numbers to Holland have been going down we can ship a few from the UK to Holland.

 

[Trausti]

There are girls in Rotherdam who remain unpimped and women in Sweden who have not been raped. We need to correct these deficiencies with migrant vibrancy.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3vvbCf_fB8[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbTSdUdQeLY[/YOUTUBE]

Hail the new "Europeans"!

 

[dystopian]

Apologies I gave some wrong figures so unfortunately some are quoting these.

Yet the fact that the actual numbers are not even remotely scary or indicative of a real problem does not seem to change your tune any, does it?

Saudi has financial resources and really why does not take more in.

You already made this argument, repeating it doesn't make it any more relevant to the question of what *Europe* ought to do.

Since the numbers to Holland have been going down we can ship a few from the UK to Holland.

Nobody said the numbers going to Holland (or even the Netherlands) have been going down. What I pointed out was that the number of *muslims* is going down. That's called secularisation; and it does not imply the number of islamic immigrants/refugees is going down.

And by the way, you don't get to ship them to us. We *already* take in *more* refugees than you do, and that's not in relative numbers, that's in *absolute* numbers. Given how much bigger the UK is, it really should be ashamed.

 

[dystopian]

So, you claim they can't afford it... but suddenly if they do voluntary donation it wouldn't be a problem? If voluntary donation is not a problem, then obviously they *can* afford it; you just don't think they should.

Those who want to donate can and those who do not don't have to.

You're shooting your argument in the foot. You claimed they can't *afford* it. Clearly they can; so now you're shifting the argument to how people should not be made to; which is a wonderfully sociopathic argument to make, really, given it's not like Italy would have any particular difficulty scrounging up the money.

Btw, I just noticed another of your claimed numbers that is wildly inaccurate. You claimed they're getting "just" 34.60 euros a day, plus lunch. My eyes glazed over reading that the first time, but now that I take a second look, that really is an absurd number. No, *of course* the refugees aren't getting 34 euros a day to spend. They could live a week off that even up here (and I'm guess Italy is cheaper). The refugees in Italy are *actually* getting only 3 euros a day to spend as they see fit. You probably confused the estimated total cost with the amount of money that's actually directly put into their hands. Which is either incredibly dishonest if intentional, or yet another example of your paranoia making you jump to conclusions. Now then, it's true that it is estimated to cost around 35 euros a day for the Italian government; that includes the cost of just about everything, from constructing the asylum centers, to training, personnel salaries, etc etc etc. So while it costs the government 35 euros a day, it is not a *loss* of 35 euros a day for the Italian economy, as most of that money goes directly to Italian companies and workers, and most of the money that goes to the asylum seekers is actually put back into the Italian economy as well via the things they buy.

Anyway, total cost for the government adds up to around 13,000 euros a year. Italy had 15,300 asylum applications in the first quarter of 2015. Let's assume for the sake of argument that all of them are taken in. Let's also assume, again for the sake of argument, the exact same number comes in every quarter. Total cost for the Italian government? A little over 1 billion euros. And that's assuming all of the refugees actually stay for the full duration of the year and avail themselves of everything the government does for them, which is a rather big if.

Still, sounds like a lot, doesn't it? A billion euros! Except, Italy has a GDP of 2,2 trillion euros; and a government budget of around 1,1 trillion euros. Suddenly, a billion euros more or less doesn't seem like a big deal, does it? And again, keep in mind that that billion is not actually a net loss of a billion euros, for either the Italian economy or the government (which will get a good percentage of that back in taxes anyway)

So, can we agree to stop pretending like they can't afford it?

 

[Ford]

And anyway, there's an elegantly simple solution: honorary French citizenship for the Donald. You just won't believe how great he'll be at solving the problem.

Time is wasting to start building the wall in Europe!

Or perhaps just one small wall, and a curtain everywhere else?