Europe submits voluntarily

[Jokodo]

The only migrants a country would benefit from are the skilled varieties that are in short supply in the host country. Those migrants contribute almost immediately by becoming tax payers. The non skilled or refugees are a burden on tax payers and national budgets for years to come because of their unsuitablity, or just uninterest in gaining useful employment. The predominant western suburbs of Sydney which have huge population of Muslims for example have the highest number of unemployment.

This may or may not be so, but it's irrelevant to what we've been discussing.

 

[Derec]

This may or may not be so, but it's irrelevant to what we've been discussing.

How so?

 

[Jokodo]

This may or may not be so, but it's irrelevant to what we've been discussing.

How so?

We were discussing the effect on the German state's finances between now and 2020-ish. Whether they'll become productive in three, eight, or 25 years or for that matter never is fairly irrelevant to costs incurred by the current migrants in the now, and even if the latter were true, it doesn't change the fact that angelo has been misusing a figure he apparently didn't understand.

 

[Derec]

We were discussing the effect on the German state's finances between now and 2020-ish. Whether they'll become productive in three, eight, or 25 years or for that matter never is fairly irrelevant to costs incurred by the current migrants in the now, and even if the latter were true, it doesn't change the fact that angelo has been misusing a figure he apparently didn't understand.

You are splitting hairs. The immediate effect on taxpayers is an issue, but only one issue. Another issue is islamization. Yet another is criminality, which is also due to lack of vetting. All these migrants just showed up and were let in, no questions asked. Then there is the issue that these migrants tend to be uneducated and thus will not contribue to the European economy but will rather be a burden. Note also that their families spent thousands on smugglers to get them into Europe, and thus they are expected to send money back home. So a significant fraction of whatever they earn or receive in benefits will be removed from circulation from European economy. Those remittances are a hidden cost as well.

And as far as immediate costs to taxpayers, these "refugees" cost a lot. You have case workers, housing, very generous benefits (remember that Afghan family with nine children in Austria that gets >5000 Euros per month!). You have schooling, and again, they do tend to have a lot of children. They tie up the judicial system because of all the appeals they take advantage of. When it's finally time to deport them (way too few compared to how many arrive), you have to charter a flight and even have to pay the rejected migrants so they will leave without making a fuss. That all adds up.

 

[Derec]

And counties with higher stork populations have higher birth rates than cities too!

I guess your belief in storks explains your other naive beliefs.

Look at fucking history! When has a strongman's proclamation "we need more kids" ever actually lead to more kids? People's realities are determined by, well, reality, (almost) irrespective of what ideology they profess.

I don't even know where I would look something like that up. But numbers show high support for Erdogan among Turks living in Europe, and Germany specifically.

For Africa, 99% of this effect is explained by the geography of Western Africa: The more southerly countries, which tend to have fewer Muslims, also tend to be more developed by sheer force of having access to global trade through the ocean, while the landlocked, more Northern countries happen to have more Muslims for historical reasons.

Somalia is hardly landlocked (it has a lot of coastline and it is near to trade routes) but it is Muslim and has a huge TFR.

The African country with the lowest TFR is actually almost 100% Muslim (Tunisia).

The highest TFR country is Niger and it is almost all Muslim too. Somalia is also high up, also almost all Muslim.

It's even worse (for your notion) in South East Asia, where Muslim majority Malaysia and Brunei (along with mostly Buddhist Thailand and Vietnam) have TFRs below 2.0, while the country with the highest TFR is Catholic Timor Leste, followed by Catholic Philippines and Buddhist Laos.

You can cherry-pick certain countries, but overall Muslims still breed more than non-Muslims.
And what about Muslim vs. non-Muslim populations within same countries? Take Rohingya in Burma. The reason the conflict with them broke out is that ethnic Burmese fear that the Rohingya will take over demographically over time. Rohingya women start having children at very young ages (usually younger than 18, sometimes as young as 14) and have an average of 7-8 children each. Even in squalid refugee camps in Bangladesh, where nobody should be thinking about bringing more children into the world, "Save the Children" expects 48,000 new births in a single year. That corresponds to a birth rate of about 48 per thousand if we generously assume about a million Rohingya in these camps. Therefore, if Rohingya camps were their own country, they would have the highest birth rate of any country, slightly higher even than 47/1000 for Muslim Niger! And that's in difficult conditions of squalid refugee camps!

Meanwhile in reality, the number of Afghans in Germany is already declining:
https://de.statista.com/statistik/d...ge/auslaender-aus-afghanistan-in-deutschland/

That site is behind a paywall for me, but I do not buy it. Agfhans still want to enter EU in general and Germany in particular (for example via the Serbian-Croatian border) and the deportations to Afghanistan occur infrequently (every few months) and consist of a few dozen rejected fakefugees at a time. These deportation flights are also accompanied by protests.
Protests against latest Afghan deportations from Germany
This flight had a grand total of 19(!) Afghans.

Since December 2016, 155 Afghans have been deported from Germany to Afghanistan.

155 deportations in a little more than a year. Those are almost homeopathic amounts!

Yes, falling rapidly. The rate was 7.6 or so at the turn of the millennium. Click this link and say again that they don't, with a straight face if you can.

The graph makes it appear more rapid and significant than it is. It's an old trick, have the bottom of the graph represent some positive value rather than zero. Then it looks like it collapsed when in reality it is still very, very high. Enough to produce 300,000 emigres per year (many of them will end up in Europe!) and increasing population at the same time.

Iran. True story.

But many of them just use Iran as a waypoint to continue to Europe. I have read many a journalist's account of a poor Afghan "refugee" who was living in Iran, but could not find a well-enough paying job there and so decided to make the trip to Europe. Which makes them economic migrants, not refugees, and not legitimate asylum seekers either.
Note: Hussein Khavari, who raped and murdered a German woman, was living in Iran when he decided to move to Europe.

I gave you a fucking citation. Do you trust your gut feeling more than expert demographers who've been crunching the numbers from the Iranian census?

Social sciences are rightly considered softest of sciences. The data they have to work with are often flawed and their methods are frequently tainted by politics.
But even if these guys are right, they acknoledge that the transition takes time, during which Afghans can reproduce rapidly and increase their numbers. Note also the continuing influx of mass migrants from Afghanistan. Net migration from Afghanistan is 300k/year.

No, it doesn't mean that. Not when the numbers drop to half within one generation.

A generation is still a few decades. Lot of children are born in the interim. And note that as long as you have new mass migrants, they always start of in the high birthrate regime.

Current trends persisting, ten years from now even the new arrivals will be in a 2.5 children per woman mode.

You really think Afghan women will drop to 2.5 TFR in 10 years? Care to make it interesting? Speaking of bets, Gurdur (anybody remember him?) owes me a plane ticket because he thought plane travel would become hugely expensive by 2015 (or thereabouts). Too bad the archives have been lost or I could look up the very thread.

Dafuq? There's more than 3 million Afghans in Iran, and that's probably not counting undocumented illegal migrants, numbering at least another million. How's that "normal levels of migration" when barely a quarter million in Germany counts as mass migration for you?

You are discounting the similarities of their societies. Both are Islamist theocracies. The only difference is the franchise, but otherwise quite similar. It is like a Brit moving to France or vice versa. Not much of an adjustment. Quiches instead of Shepherd's Pie, wine instead of bitter, but pretty much the same. Not so when an Afghan moves to Europe. The difference of societies and large number of fellow conservative Muslims encourages formation of parallel societies. There is an example of that right here in the Atlanta region. Clarkston, GA, formerly a normal American suburb but now dominated by women in full veil and men with long beards and wearing white pajamas.

In reality, the figures dropping to half within one generation never means they stay exactly where they were for 25 years and then magically drop overnight.

Ok, but you still have a period of high birth rates initially. And I still doubt they go down as rapidly as you naively believe. Especially when you have parallel societies.

Reality disagrees. Reality doesn't change you don't like it. I've shown you facts and figures. If you prefer to remain ignorant, that's a choice.

Reality is not congruent with your cherry-picked pieces of data. Reality is that Europe is already getting islamicized. Look at elementary schools across Germany. In Berlin almost half are already majority Muslim. The share of Muslims among children is much higher than the share of Muslims overall because Muslims have so many children each.

 

[bilby]

Wait, 155 people are 'almost homeopathic amounts', but 158 are a massive number worthy of deep concern?

WTF is so important about those extra three people?

So much for fucking caravaners staying in fucking Mexico.

Dozens more caravan asylum seekers let in to U.S. from Mexico
Of course, their asylum claims are bogus. They are not being persecuted on basis of race, religion of nationality in fucking Honduras. And high crime rates and factories closing are not legitimate grounds for asylum. So they will do what most of these fakefugees are doing - they will get a hearing date, and never show up.

And letting in over a hundred caravaners will merely encourage more Central Americans to come claiming "persecution". Just like in Europe, where over 100,000 are coming to Europe each year via central Mediterranean alone because they know Europe will take them in and give them benefits instead of turning them away. Expect thousands of caravaners to show up in the coming months.

MS-13 Gang Member Arrested Traveling With Migrant Caravan From Central America to U.S.

How many undetected MS13 bangers pretending to be "minors" are among the 158 US just foolishly took in?

A hundred and fifty-eight??? Where the fuck are you going to find the space for such a horde??? That's almost three bus loads! The USA will be SWAMPED by an extra 0.000048% being added to her population, and the other 99.999952% of you are going to be totally DOMINATED by this HUGE threat.

/sarcasm

 

[Jokodo]

I guess your belief in storks explains your other naive beliefs.


I don't even know where I would look something like that up. But numbers show high support for Erdogan among Turks living in Europe, and Germany specifically.

Which means exactly nothing for whether they'll follow suit to his appeals.

For Africa, 99% of this effect is explained by the geography of Western Africa: The more southerly countries, which tend to have fewer Muslims, also tend to be more developed by sheer force of having access to global trade through the ocean, while the landlocked, more Northern countries happen to have more Muslims for historical reasons.

Somalia is hardly landlocked (it has a lot of coastline and it is near to trade routes) but it is Muslim and has a huge TFR.

Cherry-picking much? Neighboring Djibouti, also almost 100% Muslim and a majority of whose population are ethnically Somali, has a TFR less than half of Somalia's. So maybe, just maybe, the high TFR in Somalia has more to do with the destitute situation the country is in and consequent low level of development than with the religion of its inhabitants?

The African country with the lowest TFR is actually almost 100% Muslim (Tunisia).

The highest TFR country is Niger and it is almost all Muslim too. Somalia is also high up, also almost all Muslim.

It's even worse (for your notion) in South East Asia, where Muslim majority Malaysia and Brunei (along with mostly Buddhist Thailand and Vietnam) have TFRs below 2.0, while the country with the highest TFR is Catholic Timor Leste, followed by Catholic Philippines and Buddhist Laos.

You can cherry-pick certain countries, but overall Muslims still breed more than non-Muslims.

You need to get out more. South East Asia is not a cherry-picked country. In fact, it's not a country at all. It is a part of the world that is home to more people than North America and Oceania combined and possibly as many as Europe or South America, including more than a quarter of the world's Muslims, including the country with the largest Muslim population in the world, in absolute terms (Indonesia).

And what about Muslim vs. non-Muslim populations within same countries? Take Rohingya in Burma. The reason the conflict with them broke out is that ethnic Burmese fear that the Rohingya will take over demographically over time. Rohingya women start having children at very young ages (usually younger than 18, sometimes as young as 14) and have an average of 7-8 children each. Even in squalid refugee camps in Bangladesh, where nobody should be thinking about bringing more children into the world, "Save the Children" expects 48,000 new births in a single year. That corresponds to a birth rate of about 48 per thousand if we generously assume about a million Rohingya in these camps. Therefore, if Rohingya camps were their own country, they would have the highest birth rate of any country, slightly higher even than 47/1000 for Muslim Niger! And that's in difficult conditions of squalid refugee camps!

Meanwhile in reality, the number of Afghans in Germany is already declining:
https://de.statista.com/statistik/d...ge/auslaender-aus-afghanistan-in-deutschland/

That site is behind a paywall for me, but I do not buy it. Agfhans still want to enter EU in general and Germany in particular (for example via the Serbian-Croatian border) and the deportations to Afghanistan occur infrequently (every few months) and consist of a few dozen rejected fakefugees at a time. These deportation flights are also accompanied by protests.
Protests against latest Afghan deportations from Germany
This flight had a grand total of 19(!) Afghans.

Since December 2016, 155 Afghans have been deported from Germany to Afghanistan.

155 deportations in a little more than a year. Those are almost homeopathic amounts!

Yes, falling rapidly. The rate was 7.6 or so at the turn of the millennium. Click this link and say again that they don't, with a straight face if you can.

The graph makes it appear more rapid and significant than it is. It's an old trick, have the bottom of the graph represent some positive value rather than zero. Then it looks like it collapsed when in reality it is still very, very high.

I was not claiming that Afghanistan's TFR *is* low, only that it is falling rapidly. That is an uncontestable fact. If you're so concerned about the baseline, you can always add a second or third country with an objectively low TFR to the graph so it'll adjust. Say, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Singapore (incidentally, two countries with significant Muslim populations; in Bosnia, Muslims might even be a slight majority), like this: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN?locations=AF-BA-SG -- the drop in Afghanistan is still just as noticible.

Enough to produce 300,000 emigres per year (many of them will end up in Europe!) and increasing population at the same time.

Iran. True story.

But many of them just use Iran as a waypoint to continue to Europe. I have read many a journalist's account of a poor Afghan "refugee" who was living in Iran, but could not find a well-enough paying job there and so decided to make the trip to Europe. Which makes them economic migrants, not refugees, and not legitimate asylum seekers either.
Note: Hussein Khavari, who raped and murdered a German woman, was living in Iran when he decided to move to Europe.

I gave you a fucking citation. Do you trust your gut feeling more than expert demographers who've been crunching the numbers from the Iranian census?

Social sciences are rightly considered softest of sciences. The data they have to work with are often flawed and their methods are frequently tainted by politics.

So many words to say "yes, I trust my gut feeling more than experts who've crunched the numbers."

But even if these guys are right, they acknoledge that the transition takes time, during which Afghans can reproduce rapidly and increase their numbers. Note also the continuing influx of mass migrants from Afghanistan. Net migration from Afghanistan is 300k/year.

No, it doesn't mean that. Not when the numbers drop to half within one generation.

A generation is still a few decades. Lot of children are born in the interim. And note that as long as you have new mass migrants, they always start of in the high birthrate regime.

Current trends persisting, ten years from now even the new arrivals will be in a 2.5 children per woman mode.

You really think Afghan women will drop to 2.5 TFR in 10 years? Care to make it interesting?

It's certainly a more reasonable base for extrapolation than assuming it will stay exactly where it was in 2015 (latest available figures) for the rest of eternity. It could be somewhat higher, or lower.

As a perfectly safe bet, I'm willing to bet you that TFR in Afghanistan will be at or below 3.0 by 2030. You'd be foolish to accept though, having seen the trends.

Dafuq? There's more than 3 million Afghans in Iran, and that's probably not counting undocumented illegal migrants, numbering at least another million. How's that "normal levels of migration" when barely a quarter million in Germany counts as mass migration for you?

You are discounting the similarities of their societies. Both are Islamist theocracies. The only difference is the franchise, but otherwise quite similar. It is like a Brit moving to France or vice versa. Not much of an adjustment. Quiches instead of Shepherd's Pie, wine instead of bitter, but pretty much the same. Not so when an Afghan moves to Europe. The difference of societies and large number of fellow conservative Muslims encourages formation of parallel societies. There is an example of that right here in the Atlanta region. Clarkston, GA, formerly a normal American suburb but now dominated by women in full veil and men with long beards and wearing white pajamas.

In the only respect that's relevant for our discussion, Iran is more apart from Afghanistan than the US is (yes, Iran does have a lower TFR than the US).

In reality, the figures dropping to half within one generation never means they stay exactly where they were for 25 years and then magically drop overnight.

Ok, but you still have a period of high birth rates initially. And I still doubt they go down as rapidly as you naively believe. Especially when you have parallel societies.

Reality disagrees. Reality doesn't change you don't like it. I've shown you facts and figures. If you prefer to remain ignorant, that's a choice.

Reality is not congruent with your cherry-picked pieces of data. Reality is that Europe is already getting islamicized. Look at elementary schools across Germany. In Berlin almost half are already majority Muslim. The share of Muslims among children is much higher than the share of Muslims overall because Muslims have so many children each.

Or because many non-Muslims move out to the suburbs. Or because Muslims are on average younger, so they'll have more children even without a significantly higher TFR. Or because a dozen other reasons.

 

[angelo]

None of this changes the fact that retrograde, supremacists, sharia followers of Muhammad, most probably the most bloodthirsty terrorist of all time are not and never will be compatible with Western European values of freedom and democracy.

 

[laughing dog]

Reality is that Europe is already getting islamicized.

That is more than delusional when one realizes that Europe extends far beyond Germany.

 

[angelo]

Reality is that Europe is already getting islamicized.

That is more than delusional when one realizes that Europe extends far beyond Germany.

That's because for the time been, Eastern Europe on the whole are refusing to accept the Muslim hoardes. But all that needs to change is for some or all Eastern countries is for changes of government that are as traitorous as Merkel for example.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The only migrants a country would benefit from are the skilled varieties that are in short supply in the host country. Those migrants contribute almost immediately by becoming tax payers. The non skilled or refugees are a burden on tax payers and national budgets for years to come because of their unsuitablity, or just uninterest in gaining useful employment. The predominant western suburbs of Sydney which have huge population of Muslims for example have the highest number of unemployment.

You continually confuse refugees with migrants. It makes it very hard to take you seriously

 

[angelo]

The only migrants a country would benefit from are the skilled varieties that are in short supply in the host country. Those migrants contribute almost immediately by becoming tax payers. The non skilled or refugees are a burden on tax payers and national budgets for years to come because of their unsuitablity, or just uninterest in gaining useful employment. The predominant western suburbs of Sydney which have huge population of Muslims for example have the highest number of unemployment.

You continually confuse refugees with migrants. It makes it very hard to take you seriously

How many " refugees " actually do turn out to be genuine?

 

[angelo]

The only migrants a country would benefit from are the skilled varieties that are in short supply in the host country. Those migrants contribute almost immediately by becoming tax payers. The non skilled or refugees are a burden on tax payers and national budgets for years to come because of their unsuitablity, or just uninterest in gaining useful employment. The predominant western suburbs of Sydney which have huge population of Muslims for example have the highest number of unemployment.

You continually confuse refugees with migrants. It makes it very hard to take you seriously

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-not-refugees-eu-vice-president-a6836306.html

 

[DrZoidberg]

The only migrants a country would benefit from are the skilled varieties that are in short supply in the host country. Those migrants contribute almost immediately by becoming tax payers. The non skilled or refugees are a burden on tax payers and national budgets for years to come because of their unsuitablity, or just uninterest in gaining useful employment. The predominant western suburbs of Sydney which have huge population of Muslims for example have the highest number of unemployment.

You continually confuse refugees with migrants. It makes it very hard to take you seriously

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-not-refugees-eu-vice-president-a6836306.html

It doesn't how many fake refugees come. It doesn't magically make the genuine refugees fake.

You continually treat the two categories as the same

 

[angelo]

How can the few genuine refugees be speedily seperated from the freeloaders when they are told by people smugglers to throw away all identify papers before they board their leaky boats?

 

[Derec]

Teenage girl found guilty of plotting terror attack in London

Girl fell in love with an ISIS terrorist. He tried to convince her to do a terrorist attack and she demurred until he was killed when she decided to go through with it in her beau's honor and roped her sister, mother and a friend into the plot to form the first known ISIS all female terror cell.

 

[bilby]

Teenage girl found guilty of plotting terror attack in London

Girl fell in love with an ISIS terrorist. He tried to convince her to do a terrorist attack and she demurred until he was killed when she decided to go through with it in her beau's honor and roped her sister, mother and a friend into the plot to form the first known ISIS all female terror cell.

And their detention, trial, and conviction is somehow an indication of submission on the part of Europe?

Or are you using this case to illustrate the inherent falsehood and idiocy of the thread title?

 

[angelo]

When added to all other terrorist attacks happening in Europe, how anyone can ignore the truth of what's happening is criminal! A crime against Western culture and values, a crime against our forefathers who fought and died to give you the freedom of speech you're using now. It's a crime against our future generations who will look back and ask why this generation let all these freedoms be destroyed by allowing a barbaric, supremacists ideology take over from a Western
Democracy that has contributed more to the world in 300 years than all the others had over 100s of thousands of years.

 

[Trausti]

Celebrate diversity!

 

[Trausti]

Celebrate diversity!