Then you're not aware of your surroundings.
Equals to practicing shooting in a shoping mall.
P.s.
Im putting words in your mouth by quoting you.
#3 rd post
Last edited:
NatGas: Belarus threatens to cut off gas to Western Europe
- Thread starter thecoder
- Start date
Equals to practicing shooting in a shoping mall.
P.s.
Im putting words in your mouth by quoting you.
#3 rd post
"those" being those who were vetted and chosen as being an asset to Germany. You know exactly what group of migrants I was referring to. What is weird is that you took cynicism about physical attributes to a whole other level and launched a vendetta.
To make it very clear: I approve and think controlled migration is what countries like Germany need and what adds value to them. I am against uncontrolled migration. Are you good with that? Or more bazookas you intend to launch?
To make it very clear: I approve and think controlled migration is what countries like Germany need and what adds value to them. I am against uncontrolled migration. Are you good with that? Or more bazookas you intend to launch?
Last edited:
Neither do Russians, Slavic people, Southern Europeans (per Northern European standards). Or you think Greeks or Lithuanians take the same religious care of their little front yards, cars and house as Austrians or Dutch or Germans? My point is that one can always find differentiating factors across religions and cultural groups. Where exactly do you delineate what is acceptable and unacceptable integration and adoption?
Nah. Not really.
Say for e.g, i came under a thread of abortions and started to write about the potential of unborn children, while supporting abortions, that would be kinda - missleading.
Now, you sound reasonable and that remains for the Germans to decide.
Meanwhile, my country, will watch over it's borders, while helping war refugees, those like from Ukraine.
Sure thing, that's a selection bias in that most people from Iran that have had the option of escaping the current socioeconomic collapse caused by the regime have done so. I.e. when seeing Persians abroad they're more likely to be educated or otherwise affluent simply because they at least had the option of going. Not sure if I would have labeled them refugees in the word's strictest sense though until recently when sections of the population are literally on the brink of starvation.
A tangent: In Sweden we've received a mix of random refugees from Syria and elsewhere the last decade (peaking in 2015). The trouble is, even highly educated refugees can have trouble finding jobs here when there are not enough employers prepared to deal with the associated bureaucracy (=time/cost). E.g. to get a doctor employed here, they must, aside from learning the native language to a degree where they can understand patients, have his/her education be verified to fulfill local requirements. Currently such bureaucracy is being streamlined but the issue will remain to an extent.
As for whether it's a net gain to Sweden with such large immigration here - in absolute terms it will probably be (though GDP has been stagnant for a few years), but per capita? That remains to be seen - integrating people we have here now will take decades more. We've failed badly so far in some respects.
Yeah because I believe immigration is not the only solution or the most optimum solution to resolving issues and @d08 is at least open to some immigration. That's why I am the one without reason. LOL
Regardless, all of us believe the following:
1. The host country has every right to decide about its immigration policy in its own best interest, not in the interest of the immigrants regardless of the immigrant's intelligence, ability, or whatever. Even if the immigrant is a genius but if the host country is not into immigration, the immigrant needs to go somewhere and that's that. And even whether the immigrant is going to integrate or not is irrelevant. Just like with your own house, if you want to shut and lock your front door and not want anyone else other than your own family members and your invited guests to enter your house, you should have the right to do so. Nobody should be allowed to storm your front porch and bang on your door demanding entry no matter how intelligent or well-educated or willing to get along with you and your family. These are all irrelevant. With a country, it's exactly the same. Being able to immigrate to another country is a privilege and NOT a right and that privilege is granted at the sole discretion of the host country and it's non-negotiable.
2. It should be listed in the Hague Convention that migration by a massive number of people being forced upon the border of one country by another country should be considered a war crime because it results in the genocide of the migrants and the country being forced to receive the migrants. And every single country should have the right to defend its border just like any individual has the right to call upon law enforcement or use any means to defend their own house against any forcible entry of any unauthorized and uninvited persons.
All of us are in agreement of this so stop your "divide and conquer" tactics pitting one member against another. LOL It's just pathetic. And being able to defend one's sovereign border is every country's given right and it's far from fascists where they believe in murdering a certain group of people different from them based on hatred so be careful of what you wish for, @VicBee. If anyone still believes it's correct for people to just force themselves onto any country that they want to go to, feel free to open the doors of their own country (like China for @thecoder/@breadcrum and @VicBee ) to let in any migrants. After all, China is the second largest economy in the world, it should step up to shoulder more responsibilities like receiving more refugees and migrants to pay back the world that's been making it rich.
Look at all those ghost cities in China:
That's enough to host at least 3 countries worth of migrants, all those highly educated, diligent, property-buying, tax-paying migrants... Why isn't China opening its doors to even controlled immigration? China has an aging population as well as a declining birth rate. Isn't this why it's recently expanded its 2-children policy to 3-children policy? so WHY is China not having controlled immigration and instead encouraging its own citizens to have more babies?? LOL
Last edited:
That is downright racist. And the answer to that question is YES!! You obviously have never been around the world and have never met anybody besides who you saw in your tiny little apartment that you are holed up in, in whatever country that you reside in (my guess is China). China is the only big country (in size and economy only) around the world that's never had massive immigration where you actually live side by side with people around the world on a permanent basis and really get to know them.
That would be the only plausible explanation for your narrow-minded stereotypical racist garbage that you pollute ET servers with. You are getting very close to being banned. Racist garbage is not tolerated on ET just so you know. So far you have contributed nothing to ET here regarding investment or trading or anything related to finance besides spewing threads after threads and posts after posts full of racist crap.
I think it's red pill time
