Topic: Illegal Migrant Crisis in Mediterraean - page 7. (Read 6586 times)

Even if there are millions of job vacancies available, very few of these "refugees" will be willing to work. Even now, a very small fraction of the people who are classified as refugees in the United Kingdom work full-time. The remainder live off the welfare payments, or indulge in petty crimes such as drug trafficking to earn money.

Calling them illegal migrants instead of asylum seekers /refugees removes any kind of guilt associated with turning them back. That said each country should be free to decide its own asylum / immigration policies.

I find it funny that these countries are forced by the EU committee not only to accept these people but also to pay them wages. This is ridiculous as I can understand accepting someone and giving him asylum, but paying him and granting all social services? Come on, it's not like these are disabled people that need the government to feed and clothe them. And who is going to pay for it? The taxpayers, who else...

Don't worry, the UK will take them all. There are lots of cheap empty houses, the NHS is a long way from breaking point and 600'000 empty job positions, so they wouldn't need to live a life of crime.

I asked my friend from China about the illegals from that country since the cost of gaining entry is surprisingly high.  She said that what happens is that entire families chip in as and investment of sorts to raise the money.  IIRC, some people were caught on an ocean vessel and they had paid like $40,000 to get across the Pacific.  Considering the jobs these people seem to take I had (and still have) some difficulty understanding the economics.  But it doesn't bother me all that much.  I personally feel that our country is well served by the inclusion of hard working and industrious people be they from Mexico, China, or elsewhere.  For now.

This might be an incomplete analysis and/or limited to immigrants from that particular area to mine.  There does seem to be a pretty noticeable campaign on the part of many of our leaderships (or a group coordinating the leaders themselves) to get immigration happening so it would not surprise me if there were some funding which trickles down to immigrants themselves as you describe.

It costs somewhere between $10,000 and $15,000 for a migrant to reach Lampedusa or Malta, from a Sub Saharan nation such as Gambia. This $10,000 is a very big amount in Gambia. It is almost 10 times the average annual salary there. This makes it clear that it is the rich, and not the poor, who undertake the trip to Europe.

Saddam,
we dont need to shoot them, Australia already has rather elegant solution of "zero tolerance". That is - if you break a law during crossing the borders, you shall not stay in country. Ever. Similar thing could be adopted in Europe, even retroactively.

While you are right about multiculturalism brainwashing people, I find that vast majority of eastern Euros from new member states are unmoved and remain sceptical - perhaps because recent experience with communism or relatively long isolation from increasingly internally weak West. I also spoke with some Germans, who altough refrained from comments such as "shoot them" were also extremely sceptical. Everybody somehow understands, that this is start of nothing good and natives are not consulted by authorities anymore. There is no democracy in EU currently and peoples options to defend their interests are extremely limited.


True. Vast majority (80%) are men in their teens and twenties too, who somehow got thousands of US dollars for travel across two continents. For all intents and purposes, they look, smell and behave like an invading force.

"those who want to live let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live"

could easily be stopped by sinking a couple of boats or just rounding the people up and dumping them in libya but europeans lack the ruthlessness to do it at this present time

you need to understand europeans born after 1970 are brainwashed almost from birth to believe race is a social construct and there is no difference between a swede and an eritrean, that they are obliged to provide housing and welfare to anyone refugee who wants it, that when african immigrants arrive on their shores by the million and steal and rape their women its due to socioeconomic factors white people created so we owe them something forever, that disagreeing with any of this is very bad thing as it makes them racists and racists are evil people who secretly want to turn jews into soap and lampshades

we've gone soft , feminised, pacified by cultural marxist egalitarian self hating indoctrination, but i'm optimistic about things and have faith in the people of europe, and when they wake up and rise up get ready for a REAL fucking holocaust when the bastards who created this mess are held to account

I think that the European Union quota takes in to account only the Mediterranean refugees. Almost all of them are Sub-Saharan African, especially from countries such as Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Liberia, Mali.etc. Although a small number are Arabs and Berbers from the Maghreb, especially Tunisia and Libya.

Bryant,

refugees are not racially homogenous. Tens of thousands also come from places such as protectorate of Kosovo, Syria and Afghanistan. You have good point on the opinion of the natives, though. Last week, there was outcry in Latvia, that illegals, who were trying to get into Germany (and were stopped in Latvia of all places) receive higher state benefits, then Latvias pensioners. Migrants still let themselves be heard, though, that they dont want to stay in country that poor. It would be hilarious, if we werent talking about entire continent bending in.

One million sub-Saharan immigrants a year. Good luck with that. 

It will be interesting to see how the homogeneous nations within the European Union react to this "migrant" quota proposal. Countries such as Latvia and Lithuania, where the current African population can be counted on the fingers of one hand, will be forced to take up tens of thousands of them. And the economies of these nations are already broke. How they are going to give welfare benefit payments to the immigrants?

Good point. Region polarized by ethnic, religious and class hatred might be easy to control by outside power. Local authorities would also get good excuse to curb civil liberties "if it only saves one life!".

Polarized people who are fighting among themselves are easier for leaders to manage.  This will be combined with austerity to increase the level of friction.

This year, aprox. 600 000 new asylum seekers are expected on EU borders, analysts already predict perhaps one million next year. This is nothing new, for years thousands were migrating towards Europe, searching refugee, better life or just piece of its welfare system. However current crisis is unlike any other for following reasons.

- Western Europe has been trying (and failing) its romance with multiculturalism for decades now, integration of millions of its "new citizens" has to large degree failed as we can see in cities such as Malmö, London, Paris, Calais or suburbs of Berlin. Letting in one million of foreigners with completely different value system every year might be just irresponsible.

- As direct result of the above, euro comitee now wants binding quota, that would force smaller countries to also take in refugees - this of course disregards the fact, that new member states such as Poland or Czech republic already took care for tens of thousands Ukrainians, Vietnamese and Roma. That just doesnt count.

- In most progressive countries such as Sweden or Austria, even small towns are now forced to take in migrants under the threat of government sanctions. In Austria, every town has to take in atleast 1 migrant per 266 inhabitants, in Sweden it is 1 migrant per 300 inhabitants.

- As result of the state sponsored multiculturalism (which all but replaced religion in northern-western Europe), any criticism of either immigration or Islam is seen as criminal offense in Sweden, starting from 1/1/2015.

- Cant speak for westerners, however in my country (Czech republic), 92% of population is against the quota and for self-determination and voluntary help. Regardless, local goverment already assured its citizens, that quota will be accepted in the future, it is only question when.

- Current euro asylum system is quite motivating for people smugglers (who already take aprox. 6000 dollars per migrant, before they allow them to board their ships). Recent tactics, is to throw (!) passengers overboard, when ship from some european nation appears on horizon, forcing the euro crew to rush to rescue. Job done, money already received.

- In places such as southern Italy, large mobs of visitors were leaving detention camps, occupying buildings, throwing out inhabitants if any were found inside. All areas heavily hit by migration start to heavily resemble Detroit.

- In northern France drivers and policemen are frequently attacked for preventing migrants to cross La Manche into the Britain - and its welfare system. Along with the fact, that 80% of these people are young men under the age of 30, it begs the question: Is their absolute majority fleeing from something or rushing towards it?

- Main donor countries: Kosovo, Eritrea, Nigeria, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia. Rich and culturally close countries (Saudi Arabia, Quatar, UAE) refuse to take them in. Countries responsible for unrest in middle East (vast majority of them english speaking) also do not take them in.
 
I ask for civil discussion on the matter. Thank you.