How to solve problems: ignore them until they go away
This is really the big problem with the EU and the UN: they have no teeth. There's really not much they're willing to do in response when member states violate agreements beyond make moderately harsh worded statements.
Cut funding. The countries who are the most vocal against it are the ones who benefit the most from the EU's funding. If you aren't willing to take a small amount of migrants which would help the EU, why should you benefit?
While I technically agree, cutting funding would have the opposite effect, since it would feed right into their propaganda that the EU is actually out to destroy them.
My uber conservative god-father and I argue about politics a lot and he hates immigration. Anyway, the other night, I was explaining that he should care about climate change due to how at least 2bn people nearer the equator would be displaced by much higher average temperatures and there'd be a shit-ton of immigration. His rebuttal was that it was just evolution (IMO eugenics) at work and that it will make the weather nicer in England.
Ugh.
Northing screams integrational and solidarian like national individualism and ignorance.
This is why imo the last governments on earth will be extreme right.
With food getting more expensive, poverty rising and weather getting worse, less and less people will see the incoming millions as people as vulnerable as them and start seeing them more as an incoming threat.
Bulgaria and Poland are just the start imo
I do not believe that anyone has taken this migration pact seriously - if any country did, feel free to correct me; however, what we see here (and have seen for past few years) is a global fear of immigration - which is about to get worse, as climate change is happening - and there is no good way to enforce any regulations and such regarding immigration - UN is powerless, and so is EU here - of course, there could be sanctions and such, but this will only fuel those in the power - however, something still must be done, and quickly
One way would to combat climate change and investing into poorer, developing countries - so people have less reasons to immigrate, and have jobs (stemming from investments) that could give stability; of course, people dont immigrate just for economical factor alone, but it could be first good step
The logical counter argument to that would be the fact that their economies and geopolitical status will collapse like the UK's has. But the problem is they won't respond to a logical argument because they're relying on an illogical argument to begin with.
They're already going down that path themselves. They reap the benefits while shunning their duties towards other countries
So fuck them, they can leave and enjoy their happy little white Christian dictatorships. There are countries in the EU that deserve those resources more than they do
Until the pact can differentiate between a refugee and an economic migrant, its a waste of time.
At this point in time a refugee and an economic migrant may aswell be the same thing. The lines are blurred in the first place, and they have been especially blurred over the last few years by people who claim that we need to distinguish between the two but upon confrontation make it apparent that they're all unwanted in the end anyways.
People like that should not be allowed to breed
Isn't that why asylum-seeking programs exist?
Except this document does not distinguish between a refugee/asylum seeker and an economic migrant, that has been one of the main criticisms, we cannot be the insurance policy to other countries bad economic policies and actions, migration will lose the public's support, which in turn limits governments in their actions to help legitimate refugees/asylum seekers.
mfw we end up taking people in from Venezuela because they can't afford a TV.
That sounds really awful for you - I can't imagine how difficult it must be to not be able to buy food anymore. Oh, did I say you? I meant them.
Complete sociopathy.
It's interesting you say that, because I do get on with him in many ways, but I mentioned how, with his rationale on human survival, I would be dead due to a major suicide attempt in 2013. I asked him if he would be okay with that. He then made what may or may not be a joke that I would indeed be dead under his system. I kinda nervously laughed, but I honestly think it's likely he believes that. =/ Kinda disturbing, IMO.
You seem to have a concept yourself, care to explain ?
About your Venezuela example: A bread costed 1.4 Million there this summer, the average monthly salary was 5.5 Million.
What is your point there?
It was a dramatic example, however the point remains, due to the fact we would be unable to distinguish between refugee/asylum seekers and economic migrants, we act as an insurance policy to bad economic decisions, thus the people who truly need our help will instead be lumped in with people just running away from poverty.
So do you want to save people from the gassing chamber or just someone the UN says is 'poor'. Remember, once you begin to throw refugees and asylum seekers in with people with poverty, you are starting to look at half the planet.
Can you cite this anywhere, because as far as I can tell it's not Hungary's criticism. They are citing national security.
I'm curious.
Why should these countries be forced to sign and/or take migrants,refugees if they don't want to?
Rate me all sorts of bad ratings, but this is a country making it's own decision, in not wanting to sign a pact to allow for a flow of peoples displaced by war,looking for work,etc. By all means it can be considered wrong, but doesn't the nation have the right to decide if it wants to take these peoples on? If I were European nation, I'd be heavily wary about taking anyone, specifically from the Middle East with all that's happened there. If we use a smaller example, you wouldn't let just anyone into your house would you, even more so if you're able to consider where they're coming from and how that could affect your life as well theirs.
If you're only trying to escape poverty, then you're an immigrant and you should go through the process of the country as it determines if you should be allowed to immigrate. If you seek asylum, then you'll go through that process. I'm not saying grant everybody asylum just because they're fleeing poverty. I just don't think agree with the idea that refugees should have to stay in the nearest "safe" place, typically a neighbouring country.
German conservatives against UN migration pact | Germany| News a..
Marian Wendt, a CDU lawmaker and member of the Bundestag's home affairs committee, told DW on Tuesday that he was concerned that the compact did not distinguish between economic migrants and asylum-seekers
ya I'm sure the problem with many of these countries is their economic policies, that's really what's caused them to flounder. Dern pinko's can't run a free market right and now we can't be expected to employ their refuse.
It's sort of like if you at your job decided that you didn't want to help while still recieving pay and benefits.
We pay for the UN though.
Just about everyone I know in real life is a homophobe and a racist. Never will be a fucking progressive country.
I feel like I'm stuck in a time loop while the rest of the world continues forward.
My home country's government has it's head up it's own ass. News at 11.
I can only speak for my country, but I really have to say, you are giving our border guard and the people on top too much credit with that reasoning. I can assure you, they don't really care. They just want another issue to distract the public from the fact that the place is a corrupt shithole. They have operated on xenophobia and scapegoating since the wall fell. If it wasn't the turks, it was the romani, now if it isn't the romani it's the refugees. Also, I do love seeing the overly emotional rhetoric masked as rationalism used by them in this very thread.
Hello Volen Siderov.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
