Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Introduce clear and hard rules on immigration, similar to the Green Card system. Lax rules for immigration will lead to more and more refugees coming and dying.
All in all it actualy seems like supporting these boats is actualy bad for humanitartian reasons.
1. If it is allowed to grow, it will mean that more peole will then travel, which makes saving them harder and harder.
2. The peole that manage to get on these boats tend to be the ones that are needed in the building of their state of origin, so taking them away will only slow progres down.
Sigvatr wrote: Introduce clear and hard rules on immigration, similar to the Green Card system. Lax rules for immigration will lead to more and more refugees coming and dying.
Exactly, people from sub-saharan states and/or zones of war are a) going to read a lot about EU legislation before they go onboard and b) will give 2 cents.
Just like the Mexicans did/do in the US.
Right?
And who said we had lax rules of immigration? You are entitled to your opinion but backing it up with some facts (a so-called "reality check") is always useful.
I agree that clear - and EU-wide regulations need to be put in place but the "deterrence by (escalating) force" is already wrong (i.e. ineffective) in criminal law, it will do nothing to stop refugees from coming. The only thing that keeps people from coming is a viable perspective to have a decent life in physical and economical security in their home country.
And since people do not like to pay for something that has no immediate effect or that "THEY should sort out by themselves", we are stuck with the situation at hand.
The only thing that keeps refugees from dying on the seas is us catching them before they do so. Even EU exclave refugee camps in northern africa are more favorable to people than dying on the high seas.
On another note, Germany alone needs a yearly influx of 400-500k people of working age, only in order to stabilize our level of social security (pensions, mostly). Last year it was close to 300k, most of which came from Poland (and thank god for those!)
We (Europe) can't deter these people without resorting to terror tactics which I sincerely hope we never do
(ie sink all the boats and let everybody drown plus immediate deportation irrespective of circumstance of anybody who has illegally entered including any of European born children)
The people who are coming are a mix of
genuine refugees (lost everything, no hope left in their own countries so even a real risk of death is seen as a 'best choice)
economic migrants (a mix of those with the get up and go to actually achieve things, people who would be starting small businesses in the west, or those with families to pay for which they just can't manage at home, they either accept the risk, or just don't think bad things will happen to them with the 'business startup' comfidence that lets they try to succeed)
those trafficked by criminal organisations for labour, sex etc (who are going to keep on being sent until the costs of doing so are higher than the money the gangs can bring in)
we can reduce the numbers at sea by allowing more official immigration (both refugee and economic), by making it harder to stay in Europe illegally, by stopping messing about in foreign wars (either do nothing, or do a lot more), b channeling more money into foreign development (as opposed to short term aid) etc
Sigvatr wrote: Introduce clear and hard rules on immigration, similar to the Green Card system. Lax rules for immigration will lead to more and more refugees coming and dying.
Exactly, people from sub-saharan states and/or zones of war are a) going to read a lot about EU legislation before they go onboard and b) will give 2 cents. Just like the Mexicans did/do in the US. Right?
It's not about informing them, it's about having a firm legal basis to refuse immigration.
And who said we had lax rules of immigration? You are entitled to your opinion but backing it up with some facts (a so-called "reality check") is always useful.
Compare to the Green Card system. A good immigration system focuses on useful immigration.
On another note, Germany alone needs a yearly influx of 400-500k people of working age, only in order to stabilize our level of social security (pensions, mostly). Last year it was close to 300k, most of which came from Poland (and thank god for those!)
Germany needs skilled workers. That's why a good immigration sysem is highly necessary. Again: Green Card system. Hard, easily understandable rules. If you can actively benefit the country, please come to us and we will help you with everything you need to get started. If you can't, then there's plenty of other fish in the sea.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/05/12 11:50:53
Sigvatr wrote: Introduce clear and hard rules on immigration, similar to the Green Card system. Lax rules for immigration will lead to more and more refugees coming and dying.
Exactly, people from sub-saharan states and/or zones of war are a) going to read a lot about EU legislation before they go onboard and b) will give 2 cents.
Just like the Mexicans did/do in the US.
Right?
It's not about informing them, it's about having a firm legal basis to refuse immigration.
And who said we had lax rules of immigration? You are entitled to your opinion but backing it up with some facts (a so-called "reality check") is always useful.
Compare to the Green Card system. A good immigration system focuses on useful immigration.
On another note, Germany alone needs a yearly influx of 400-500k people of working age, only in order to stabilize our level of social security (pensions, mostly). Last year it was close to 300k, most of which came from Poland (and thank god for those!)
Germany needs skilled workers. That's why a good immigration sysem is highly necessary. Again: Green Card system. Hard, easily understandable rules. If you can actively benefit the country, please come to us and we will help you with everything you need to get started. If you can't, then there's plenty of other fish in the sea.
How does that help with the problem of (dying) boat people? Will those people suddenly stop coming and think "Oh, I better get a PHD before I try escaping the incredible mess in my home country"?
And how exactly does an even harder immigration regime help with getting more people with a higher skill set?
Again, how has a green card system helped the US with Mexican immigration? Other than creating a huge subset of society that lives in illegality and constant fear of losing everything they have built up in the States.
The best way to stop immigrants from coming to your country is to completely ruin it politically, economically, and militarily. Then, when your country look sworse than the countries they are coming from, the immigrants won;t come.
Simple really.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
Considering the people who come from failed states, arguably could legitimately claim refugee status, and don't have ID papers, ho do we expect them to have got copies of their exam certificates that we could actually verify.
NATO should send its army to pacify Libya. NATO is responsible for this current mess, they should also clean it up.
It will also at least decrease the stream of immigrants.
I do not think there is a good solution. At least, not one that would not cost so much money no one in the EU wants to try it.
Easy E wrote: The best way to stop immigrants from coming to your country is to completely ruin it politically, economically, and militarily. Then, when your country look sworse than the countries they are coming from, the immigrants won;t come.
Simple really.
Have you considered hiring out the Russian seals?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
I'm on board. Anyone willing to risk dying for a shot at a gakky, sub-minimum wage job someplace "better" is the kind of person that I'd want to work with.
Or, as a bastardly imperialist, have work for me. If I was in a position to exploit such a person. Assuming that my morals rotted off, of course. Anyhow, I've worked with several immigrants, and they've all been hard working, industrious people.
In my personal experience, people who cry the loudest about "Illegals" are doing so as a substitute for bald faced racism. They really just don't want all those brownies in their neighbourhood.
Not casting stones at anyone in here, I don't know any of you.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
It's a hard topic, because I'm all for the 'right' kind of immigration. I know lots of talented, really gifted people from other countries who are here by virtue of their talents. More of them, I say. I don't think they're "taking ur jerbs". It's not a zero-sum like that, or shouldn't be, given enough talented people and genuinely equal opportunity.
Anyone who can't contribute? Well, I think we have plenty of those people already.
Figuring out a process to determine one from the other is left as an exercise to the reader.
In my personal experience, people who cry the loudest about "Illegals" are doing so as a substitute for bald faced racism. They really just don't want all those brownies in their neighbourhood.
Not casting stones at anyone in here, I don't know any of you.
For me it's not about not having brownies about , it's about having the brownies about that couldn't afford to try to get in illegally and were forced to live in refugee camps. I knew a few Sudanese guys , life in camps sounds bad , I'd prefer to take them as my countries refugee intake.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
In my personal experience, people who cry the loudest about "Illegals" are doing so as a substitute for bald faced racism. They really just don't want all those brownies in their neighbourhood.
Not casting stones at anyone in here, I don't know any of you.
For me it's not about not having brownies about , it's about having the brownies about that couldn't afford to try to get in illegally and were forced to live in refugee camps. I knew a few Sudanese guys , life in camps sounds bad , I'd prefer to take them as my countries refugee intake.
(speaking from a purely Australian point of view here, no idea what the situation/debate is like in Europe)
Thing is, a lot of those people don't have the time/the opportunity to get out legitimately. It can be as rushed as "grab your stuff and your loose cash and it'll buy you your first step out of here before whoever is trying to kill this week catches and ends you", which eventually leads to them in these camps on the islands with people comfy in Australia going "well if they were real refugees they would have filled out the paperwork...".
No, no they wouldn't have, go to the back of the class until they learn to think further than what the Courier Mail tells them.
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
Or they could alternately have to leave and go to a refugee camp in the Congo, where food is scarce and the government and the rebels go through the camp on alternate days. Then they spend over 5 years there.
Talking to these guys put me in favour of taking people from refugee camps. I can't imagine what it would be like to not be able to get out of the situation you were in, unlike some who can afford to travel. Can you imagine what it's like to have alternate militias go through the camps? Get asked a question by one militia you could be dead as a collaborator the next week.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
As a Minnesotan, I am kind of torn on immigration. In case anyone is unaware, we have the largest Somali community in America.
Most of the Somali people that you meet are decent enough folks, but there are always those who are not. There are issues with homegrown militants joining both the Islamic State and Al-Shabaab, terror threats, all that garbage. Especially amongst the younger generation who mostly grew up in Minnesota, and didn't see how terrible Somalia itself was.
I think that kind of over identifying is common with 2nd generation immigrant children, unfortunately i think you have to get to the 3rd generation before that exagerated identifying with their parents old country starts ending. Kinda sad that anyone wants to identify with IS or 'the death cult" as our Prime minister refers to them. God, he's a dill weed.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
I’m used to Australia having something of an echo, picking up debates from around the globe and having those same debate five to ten years later on.
So it’s a little strange to see you guys having a debate about boat people around 20 years after we started making it the national issue, and around 18 years since I was sick to fething death of it. And it’s even weirder to see the exact same points get raised, and even using the same terminology (I never thought I’d see as awkward a phrase as ‘boat people’ get re-used, but here it is in the thread title). And its probably even stranger to see the same misconceptions crop up in the debate (thinking all refugees came on boats when actually only a small fraction do, and confusing refugees with greater migration and multi-culturalism).
Anyhow, 20 years on and I can tell you we’re pretty much nowhere further on from where we started. We basically put asylum seekers in detention centres, nominally to process their claim but really to make the process more difficult to discourage other people coming (these camps are always in really gakky places). Reasonably often the claim is rejected as the individual isn’t persecuted but just looking for a better life, and we try to return them to their country of origin or somewhere else that will take them. Not many are resettled so they just stay in the camps, sometimes having a riot or sewing their lips together.
We have tried shutting the camps down, but generally that’s led to increased numbers of people attempting to reach here by sea and therefore more deaths in the open ocean.
Every so often a human rights group gets footage or testimony out of the camps and shows how horrible conditions are, and most of us nervously look the other way.
One side of the debate will claim how the current process is inhumane, and they have a point because it is. The other side of the debate will claim letting them in will encourage more to make the trip by sea and will die, and they have a point because it will. And so both sides will shout their point at the other side, with no-one willing to admit no-one has any idea how to resolve the issue.
And so look forward to 20 more years of this, Europe. Odds are in that time lots of speaches and protests will happen, dinner parties will be ruined, and at the end of it no-one will be any closer as to how you resolve the issue.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bullockist wrote: Talking to these guys put me in favour of taking people from refugee camps. I can't imagine what it would be like to not be able to get out of the situation you were in, unlike some who can afford to travel. Can you imagine what it's like to have alternate militias go through the camps? Get asked a question by one militia you could be dead as a collaborator the next week.
We take about 6,000 a year. Which is a pretty decent number by world standards, and while we could do more it is a resource intensive exercise, and the sad reality is that no matter what number we take it won't make a dent in the worldwide refugee population, which is probably around 50 million. So ultimately, while expanding our refugee intake would be a great boon to the extra people who come in to Australia, it won't impact the number of people attempting to arrive by boat, or the numbers that fail.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2015/05/13 07:30:02
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
We take about 6,000 a year. Which is a pretty decent number by world standards, and while we could do more it is a resource intensive exercise, and the sad reality is that no matter what number we take it won't make a dent in the worldwide refugee population, which is probably around 50 million. So ultimately, while expanding our refugee intake would be a great boon to the extra people who come in to Australia, it won't impact the number of people attempting to arrive by boat, or the numbers that fail.
Are you sure about the number Australia takes?
2014 Germany alone (about 3,5 times the population of Australia) received 129,000 asylum seekers, 40,000 of which were granted temporary permission to stay, refugee status, or formal asylum, and 45,000 are/were still waiting for a decision in 2015. And that is really not that much.
Compared against population, in 2014 Sweden took almost 4 times as many refugees than us, for example. (8400 per million vs. German 2500 per million)
Sigvatr wrote: Introduce clear and hard rules on immigration, similar to the Green Card system. Lax rules for immigration will lead to more and more refugees coming and dying.
Exactly, people from sub-saharan states and/or zones of war are a) going to read a lot about EU legislation before they go onboard and b) will give 2 cents.
Just like the Mexicans did/do in the US.
Right?
It's not about informing them, it's about having a firm legal basis to refuse immigration.
And who said we had lax rules of immigration? You are entitled to your opinion but backing it up with some facts (a so-called "reality check") is always useful.
Compare to the Green Card system. A good immigration system focuses on useful immigration.
On another note, Germany alone needs a yearly influx of 400-500k people of working age, only in order to stabilize our level of social security (pensions, mostly). Last year it was close to 300k, most of which came from Poland (and thank god for those!)
Germany needs skilled workers. That's why a good immigration sysem is highly necessary. Again: Green Card system. Hard, easily understandable rules. If you can actively benefit the country, please come to us and we will help you with everything you need to get started. If you can't, then there's plenty of other fish in the sea.
Your confusing legal immigration, illegal immigration and refugees. The people here are refugees. We have strong rules for legal immigration already and illegal immigration will not be fixed by changing the rules and refugees are not thinking about the rules, only "I hope I get somewhere where I am not going to be hunted down and killed for being in the wrong place".
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
Scrabb wrote: I wish America would increase its immigration quota.
Those people who are willing and able to leave everything and go try for better are the people I want on my team.
Dude we just let 12mm people stay here. What the hell are you talking about?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Scrabb wrote: I wish America would increase its immigration quota.
Those people who are willing and able to leave everything and go try for better are the people I want on my team.
Dude we just let 12mm people stay here. What the hell are you talking about?
People who came here illegally and had a chance to be abandoned by their coyotes and die in the desert, or people who got green cards and then stayed after they expired. I want the legal avenues to be able to handle demand so we don't have to have a national discussion about whether we should deport 12 million people or not.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
2014 Germany alone (about 3,5 times the population of Australia) received 129,000 asylum seekers, 40,000 of which were granted temporary permission to stay, refugee status, or formal asylum, and 45,000 are/were still waiting for a decision in 2015. And that is really not that much.
Compared against population, in 2014 Sweden took almost 4 times as many refugees than us, for example. (8400 per million vs. German 2500 per million)
I'm absolutely certain of Australia's number. 6,000 a year, and its been that way since the 80s (other than a spike in the last year of our previous government). Note that figure is referring only to people granted a final permanent right to stay in the country.
As I understand it Germany has taken on lots of temporary refugees, but not granted a permanent visa to that many.
What probably needs to be pointed out is that it's the US that grants the most people permanent refugee status each year. By a long way.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
I didn't believe that figure Sebster I had to look it up, and it seems to be true but doesn't list temporary visas ect which I'm sure other peoples posts have included. With temporaries i think the figure is 20 or 30k.
What's also weird is I know at least 20 of that 6000 from one year. High percentage considering I don't work in social services ect.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/05/14 03:00:41
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"