"Since immigration seems to be incompatible with the welfare state, a flood of immigrants, be they political, economic, or stowaways, could be a blessing in disguise: it may have the effect of proving what we suspect: that the welfare state is unsustainable."~ Pedro Schwartz, from his article, 'A Flood of Immigrants'
RELATED POSTS:
- Immigration Plus Welfare State Equal Police State – GEORGE REISMAN’S BLOG
- Fighting Terrorism Requires Legalizing Immigration – James Valliant, SOLO
- Do Refugees Need Food Stamps or Freedom? - NOT PC
- Governments Give Migrants a Disastrous Mix of Social Welfare and Bureaucracy - NOT PC
- “Poor immigrants are less likely to use welfare than poor natives” - NOT PC
19 comments:
Although, it's hardly a blessing in disguise to all the women who were attacked in Cologne, and all the other cities across Germany and Europe, on New Years Eve. The Welfare State is unsustainable, but it's end is hardly a blessing in disguise.
Richard, you'd like to link the attacks to recent refugee migration. But as the police themselves have said, "there is no evidence that refugees were involved."
You should not bend the facts to fit your viewpoint.
Peter, the police said the attackers were all either North African or Arab. You're going to argue that immigration is not the problem as long as they're not refugees? cut the crap.
Getting pissed, and then being groped and having underwear removed by drunken young men on New Year's Eve. It's happened to me and most of my friends on numerous NYE's over the years - and I didn't mind a bit! hahahahahaha!
Here's an overview of what happened that's in touch with reality, and not hopelessly lost in an ideological feedback loop.
http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/01/the-larger-motive-behind-the-groping-jihad/
Is there any evidence that those of North African or Arab descent are statistically over represented in violent crime in Europe, or are you just cherry picking incidents that match your narrative? A genuine, not a sarcastic question...
I read your link, and it appeared to be an interpretation of specific incidents to support a pre-determined narrative (in the same way the left often does). Perhaps there is evidence elsewhere to support that narrative, but the article itself doesn't provide it. Isolated incidents mean very little because every society always had its criminal element.
Would the existence of the mafia, or the Italian fascists be a reason to deny entry to the millions of Italians (including my father) who migrated to Australia or the US after WW2? If this had happened both countries would be a poorer because of it.
Yes the Italians were the best thing to happen to Australia.
Italians civilised Australia by introducing a fairly primitive "Ocker" population to wine, coffee, art, good food and this was of enormous benefit to both sides.
As for the "Mafia" that is a load of rubbish, a fantasy created by Mario Puzo at his typewriter, and it is extremely insulting to Italian people to even raise the subject Mark.
Mark, you can't seriously pretend you are incapable of doing some objective research on this matter.
https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/sweden-77-6-percent-of-all-rapes-in-the-country-committed-by-muslim-males-making-up-2-percent-of-population/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/10/uk-terrorism-stats-97-are-muslim-majority-of-domestic-extremists-are-christian/
If the vast majority of sex crimes and terrorism in the UK & Scandinavia are perpetrated by Muslims then that can hardly be 'cherry picking'. I think it's safe to say the ones with a pre-determined narrative are open door immigration ideologues like yourself.
Comparing Muslim immigrants to Italians generations ago is absurd.
Dave:
On the contrary. If, as with recent terrorist attacks, the perpetrators are those that have lived in the west for years, then the relevant question is not immigration; instead it's about welfare and multiculturalism.
Dave, the only truly relevant word in your comment is "if." Because as we've discussed here before, objective research says that claims for Sweden being rape capital of Europe are just flat wrong, and do not become true by simple repetition.
They say more about the websites, and folk spreading their fetid links, than they do about anything at all objective.
The objective research says there are major issues in Europe with Muslim immigrants committing sexual assaults & terrorism offences. Unfortunately if reality is 'fetid' you don't get to make up your own facts.
In what parallel universe can multiculturalism (specifically Islam in Europe) be a problem without immigration?
A pre-determined narrative? The fact is, if the jihad hadn't presented itself, there would be no counter-jihad movement. That is hardly a pre-determined narrative, Mark. The fact is, Islamic migration is causing real problems that are leading to people living in fear. Try being a truck driver passing through Calais. I don't need to trawl through statistics to satisfy myself that there is or isn't a problem. The problem is growing and very clearly visible. The kind of New Year that just passed in Germany and across Europe is not like previous celebrations. 500 and something attacks in Cologne, the majority of them committed by new migrants? You want me to pretend that isn't real and means nothing???
Presumably because jihadists can only be homegrown and not imported. Obviously muslims outside the country don't believe in the supremacy of Islam or jihad in the cause of Allah, Dave. It's only homegrown muslims who are the problem.
This is not your typical New Years eve celebration in Germany. It is something new.
https://youtu.be/0F0s3vxl2xQ
"I don't need to trawl through statistics to satisfy myself that there is or isn't a problem."
Well, at least you're upfront about it.
I'm honest about it, but you don't appear to be. I believe what I'm seeing, and what I'm seeing tells me all the information I need to form a conclusion. 9/11 was real. All the jihad attacks are real. That France is in a state of war is real. Why do you need statistics - statistics that are not conclusive of anything, because the methodology is so disputed - in order to determine whether or not there is a war, or whether or not Islam is good or bad for liberty and whether or not importing more muslims increases or decreases the chances of us winning the war? They are not needed. The war is real and we must fight it or not. Pick your side.
I say you are dishonest because you never acknowledge any fair points that are made. For example, you talk of the homegrown jihadists as if that invalidates imports implying that open immigration is fine. Dave makes a pretty good point about jihadists that come as migrants, but you don't acknowledge his point. You divert from it. How is that anything but dishonest?
Post a Comment