Migration always means poverty migration, not wealth migration

[Skybird]

A hot iron in Germany currently. The problem is real, and worstening. My hometown is none of the hotspots, but even here I see it with my own eyes every time I go to town: there are many more foreign beggars from the Balkan region now than there were ten years ago, more organised beggars, and beggars mobbing the few German beggars that have been here before. Two times I saw clans of theirs becoming violent against German local beggars who had held their begging spots for years before.

http://axis-of-goodness.com/2014/01/06/strong-germany-germanizes-europe/

Our marvellous political parasites' solution: insisting on that it cannot be, because it should not be. Problem solved.

[flostt]

.....in Switzerland as well....

Next Sunday all citizens with Swiss Nationality will be able to vote to curb immigration and reintroduce quotas....

This could have consequences for bilateral relations with the European Union, which considers free movement of people a fundamental right...

In case of acceptance the EU would then have the option of terminating all other bilateral agreements negotiated with Switzerland....

[Oberon]

Explain expatriates then.

[TarJak]

Or Australia. Migration was the key to industrial growth after WW2. I can't agree with the title however it may be playing out in Germany or Schweiz.

[Jimbuna]

Explain expatriates then.

Or Australia. Migration was the key to industrial growth after WW2. I can't agree with the title however it may be playing out in Germany or Schweiz.

Beaten to it....and I've been one having resided in Holland for more than two years.

[Tchocky]

Same country as Jim and definitively not in poverty

[Skybird]

German media this morning report that government numbers by the Federal Office for Labour show an increase of wellfare spendings (called Hartz IV) to migrants from Romania and Bulgaria of over 50% in 2013.

At the same time, the number amongst these people who were employed in jobs, fell to a new record low.

Amongst those who have jobs, the majority is employed in low-wage and so-called mini-jobs only. That is nothing you can support a family or a future with. The tax payer has to bail you out.

And all that was before the Visa duty ended.

Just until recently, politicians claimed publicly that such numbers and information suggesting such trends, simply would not exist. They also claimed that the majority of these migrants were "highly qualified specialists" that are urgently needed in Germany.

That raises the question why politicians so shamelessly lie about the facts.

And it raises the question why the people let these political parasites get away with it. Even elect them into offices again and again and again.

[Skybird]

Or Australia. Migration was the key to industrial growth after WW2. I can't agree with the title however it may be playing out in Germany or Schweiz.

There are migrants and there are migrants. Some go to build themselves - or for their children at least - a new future: that was key drive behind the European mass migration to America.

Others go with not intending to change, instead only to suck the money blood of the new haven they are in, and expecting the natives to adapt to them. Which makes the immigrant a colonist then.

Australia I know not much about, cannot comment.

The title I have chosen from this paragraph in the text I linked:

"Just as water flows downhill and hot air rises, migration—which is always poverty migration—goes from poverty to wealth. There’s no such thing as “wealthy migration,” unless we’re talking about Gerard Depardieu."

[Wolferz]

As you watch the poor migrate to the rich spots, the rich will migrate to places the poor can not go, for lack of airfare.:hmmm:

You can always make the best of the beggar situation by promoting bum fights.:shifty:

[Nippelspanner]

Yup, hot topic and makes me go nuts how incredibly stupid our politicians "handle" this situation. I just can't believe it. Once again the cancer called "political correctness" is hammering another nail into Germany's coffin.

I was so glad that this country became what it is (was?) after WW2, that we got the chance to become a great nation, wealthy and peaceful, again despite the whole Third Reich thing.
Now, we destroy it all from within by making the wrong decisions, wearing pink glasses of stupidity and political correctness...

I liked this country so much. When I now look at cities like Duisburg, or single districts from cities like Berlin, Hamburg or even my small hometown Lüneburg, I get the feeling that I want to emigrate to Finland's wilderness, to escape all this crap and don't have to get angry again when I read in the paper that once more a nice foreign fellow citizen beat an old man to death over nothing in a subway, for fun.
And don't get me started on the "Roma and Sinti" problem. It is unbelievable how most, not all, of these people "live" here, let alone why.

Although, if there's a country giving away freebies like stupid, I can see why the poorest of the poor are attracted. I don't even blame them.

Nothing against a healthy cultural mix, it spices things up, I do believe that, yet people should start to worry when the "healthy mix" transforms into mighty ghettos with organized crime, corruption and less police activity due to fear of incidents.

Problem here is, for all non Germans of this board, you can't just be against that as a German in Germany. As soon as you say something critical against immigration or immigrants, you get a nice red stamp on your forehead saying: "Racist!" or "Nazi!", without anyone actually listeting or fact-checking. And some groups just use that to their advantage with a big smile on their faces, like the "Central Council of Jews in Germany", or the Muslim-equivalent of this organization...

All hail the Altlast. :nope:

/off to Finland's wilderness...

[Tchocky]

That article hurts my head.


Put it this way - if a blog post purports to discuss economics, using the heading "STATISTICS CAN PROVE ANYTHING" is not the way to go.


Just as water flows downhill and hot air rises, migration—which is always poverty migration—goes from poverty to wealth. There’s no such thing as “wealthy migration,” unless we’re talking about Gerard Depardieu. That this more or less scientific fact is so insistently denied has to do with broken promises.

This more or less ridiculous statement is more or less rubbish.

[Wolferz]

Less is the new more.:rock:

[Oberon]

"Just as water flows downhill and hot air rises, migration—which is always poverty migration—goes from poverty to wealth. There’s no such thing as “wealthy migration,” unless we’re talking about Gerard Depardieu."

Then how about Britains (and Germans) who have retired to hotter climates?

[Skybird]

Millions and millions do that, yes. :88)

Not, it is not millions and millions. And many elder people moving to other countries do so because in that country their pensions allow them a modest lifestyle they cannot support in Germany anymore.

All in all, poverty and wealth migration by numbers of individuals do not compare.

What we have in Germany is a growing trend that families and children send their old parents to old-age homes in Poland, Czech Republic, Thailand and some other places in Asia, because they cannot pay for places in homes for the elderly in Germany, the costs become too high for many. I take it that this also is not what you mean by "wealth migration"...? :shucks:

[Oberon]

But we're not talking about comparisons here. The title you used makes a definition that migration always means poverty migration, not wealth migration, and yet this is not the case. Similarly the quote in which you ended your reply to Tarjak with states that migration is always poverty migration, but as you have admitted just now, that there is wealth migration, although because of the ratio of rich to poor in just about every nation on this planet, the ratio between wealth and poverty migration is helplessly one-sided.
Furthermore, the simplification of the term 'migration' discounts internal country migration, not everyone in Germany and the UK moves from richer parts of the country to poorer parts, generally movements congregate where there is a greater chance of employment, and so it is internationally, as equally as it is intranationally.

EDIT: Didn't know about the old-age home exportation...that is pretty grim, but equally in a manner of speaking it is a form of wealth migration, since it is people from one country exploiting the inequality in relative economic strength to benefit their own financial existence, for good or for ill. People come from Eastern Europe to earn more money than they can back home, and we go to Eastern Europe to make the money we've earnt go further.

[TarJak]

America wants a word also.

[Skybird]

But we're not talking about comparisons here. The title you used makes a definition that migration always means poverty migration, not wealth migration, and yet this is not the case. Similarly the quote in which you ended your reply to Tarjak with states that migration is always poverty migration, but as you have admitted just now, that there is wealth migration, although because of the ratio of rich to poor in just about every nation on this planet, the ratio between wealth and poverty migration is helplessly one-sided.
Furthermore, the simplification of the term 'migration' discounts internal country migration, not everyone in Germany and the UK moves from richer parts of the country to poorer parts, generally movements congregate where there is a greater chance of employment, and so it is internationally, as equally as it is intranationally.

EDIT: Didn't know about the old-age home exportation...that is pretty grim, but equally in a manner of speaking it is a form of wealth migration, since it is people from one country exploiting the inequality in relative economic strength to benefit their own financial existence, for good or for ill. People come from Eastern Europe to earn more money than they can back home, and we go to Eastern Europe to make the money we've earnt go further.

The great migration movements in the history of the past 2000 years, and before, all were moving-outs by tribes and people due to poverty and grim living conditions in the places where these tribes originally came from. 'Sometimes climate changes played a role, an erosion of once fertile farming grounds, or wars, or oppression.

Also, migration as a term is used today almost exclusively for mass movements caused by the need for people to move elsewhere. People moving somewhere because they< are millionaires and like to go there usually are not tagged as "migrants". Migrants go where they hope for a better life or/and hope to find better work.

If we would follow a less popular understanding of the term, then think of summer vacancies in the Western world - and understand tourists to be part-time-migrants. They move by the millions across the European continents and beyond indeed. Numerically, that is what in German would be called a "Völkerwanderung", and bigger in size than the "Völkerwanderungen" of the past 2 thousand years.

Most people have a sense for feeling home in their homeland, homeplace, home culture. Most people only move when they have very pressing, urgent material needs to move away from their homes. People who are so rich that they just read in a tourist magazine and then chose between the lovely resort they saw on the Bahamas, the Florida Keys or a godforsaken lonely island in the Chinese Sea, not really match the modern understanding of the term "migrant".

Aren't we needlessly splitting hairs here? ;) How many rich Poles have moved to Spain and Britain in the past years? How many Turkish millionaires came to Germany? Hoiw many social upper class Mexicvans move illegally into the US? How many rich Chinese enter the South Eastern areas of Russia without permission? The greek and Spanish young people moving from their homelands to Germany currently - are they really that happy to leave their homes and seek a chance in a foreign place - or aren't they do it because they see no chance for a life in their home countries?

[Tribesman]

Migrants are migrants, you cannot just change the definition of the word because your opening piece makes no sense and is easily proved contrary to fact.

[Madox58]

America wants a word also.

I vote for 'grangapomping'.
Totally made up but has that tinge of actually meaning something.
:D

If I hit the lottery? I'm grangapomping to a warmer place!
:har:

[Dan D]

"Migration alsways means poverty migration, not wealth migration".

Nonsense.

One does not simple migrate to Germany or any other country, same as one does not simply walk into Modor. Where do you get that idea from?

Example:
Client is a female doctor from Iran that came to Germany for education and training to become a specialist in nuclear medicine. Such specialists are very rare. When she decided to never go back to Iran, it was very easy to get her a residence permit after her limited study stay, because she has an income that you and I can only dream of , pays more taxes than you and I, and Germany has an urgent need for specialists in nuclear medicine.

Next example: Your "beggars" are not immigrants. If you want to stay in Germany for longer than a tourist visit, you need to be in a position that you pay taxes. Of course you can stay in Germany for longer as long as you pay taxes and don't cost money. Do beggars pay taxes? I guess not really , so there is no chance to immigrate to Germany if you are a beggar.
What you describe , "there are seemingly more beggars on the street", happens each winter. The poorest of the poor from the Balkans, Roma, Sinti and Ashkali who are excluded from social security, school, jobs etc. at home try to spend the winter here because the winters are tough on the Balkans. In some years there is a temporary expulsion ban for Romans, Sinti and Ashklai for the winter for humanitarian reasons as decided by the Conference of Interior Ministers, in some years, this year e.g. so far, not.

Example:
client, a Roma, applied for asylum in 2011, 2012 and now on 18.11.2013. His claim was rejected already on 22.11.2013 after a hearing and if he does not leave the county by 10.02.2014, which is next Monday, he will get deported.
That is pretty fast.

That problem has to be solved at home by putting political pressure on the Governments of those states, "EU membership only if your do something about that problem" and development assistance, not by legal means. It is a factual thing.

As for EU free movement, Germany is the country that benefits the most from it. Because of its economical strength it is a magnet for higly trained EU citizens who get paid better wages here. Now with the free movement for Bulgarians and Romanians it is expected that those countries suffer a brain drain of medical doctors who will come to Germany because they find work as doctors here and they get way better payments as at home which will cause problems for those countries if this causes a shortage of doctors there.

I don't think that Germany is a position to complain here.

[TarJak]

I vote for 'grangapomping'.
Totally made up but has that tinge of actually meaning something.
:D

If I hit the lottery? I'm grangapomping to a warmer place!
:har:
Nice word America! Well played, You win an Extrawursttagsgefühl! Congratulations!:know:

[Skybird]

"Migration alsways means poverty migration, not wealth migration".

Nonsense.

One does not simple migrate to Germany or any other country, same as one does not simply walk into Modor. Where do you get that idea from?

Example:
Client is a female doctor from Iran that came to Germany for education and training to become a specialist in nuclear medicine. Such specialists are very rare. When she decided to never go back to Iran, it was very easy to get her a residence permit after her limited study stay, because she has an income that you and I can only dream of , pays more taxes than you and I, and Germany has an urgent need for specialists in nuclear medicine.

Next example: Your "beggars" are not immigrants. If you want to stay in Germany for longer than a tourist visit, you need to be in a position that you pay taxes. Of course you can stay in Germany for longer as long as you pay taxes and don't cost money. Do beggars pay taxes? I guess not really , so there is no chance to immigrate to Germany if you are a beggar.
What you describe , "there are seemingly more beggars on the street", happens each winter. The poorest of the poor from the Balkans, Roma, Sinti and Ashkali who are excluded from social security, school, jobs etc. at home try to spend the winter here because the winters are tough on the Balkans. In some years there is a temporary expulsion ban for Romans, Sinti and Ashklai for the winter for humanitarian reasons as decided by the Conference of Interior Ministers, in some years, this year e.g. so far, not.

Example:
client, a Roma, applied for asylum in 2011, 2012 and now on 18.11.2013. His claim was rejected already on 22.11.2013 after a hearing and if he does not leave the county by 10.02.2014, which is next Monday, he will get deported.
That is pretty fast.

That problem has to be solved at home by putting political pressure on the Governments of those states, "EU membership only if your do something about that problem" and development assistance, not by legal means. It is a factual thing.

As for EU free movement, Germany is the country that benefits the most from it. Because of its economical strength it is a magnet for higly trained EU citizens who get paid better wages here. Now with the free movement for Bulgarians and Romanians it is expected that those countries suffer a brain drain of medical doctors who will come to Germany because they find work as doctors here and they get way better payments as at home which will cause problems for those countries if this causes a shortage of doctors there.

I don't think that Germany is a position to complain here.

Nicely deceiving. List some single cases, and declare a rule on their basis. Ignore the huge numbers. :yeah:

The beggars problem is a full-year problem, since many years now. I live since at least half of that time I noticed a change there. While many join that trail during winter, it is not a winter-exlcusively smytpom now. I would even say except the weeks before christmas, it is even worse here in summer. To say that in town you meet them literally at every corner, is true at least on some days.

When I came here 14 years ago, there were just three or four known faces within the whole town centre perimeter. Today, it is foreigners, by the looks from the Balkan region, almost exclusively. And they run their business in organised gangs. Police confirms also that the old established, known beggars in poarts have been mobbed out of the town, for the most have been forced to retreat into outer districts that are less lucrative.

Migrants are peopole moving from one country to another. Whether the state accepts them or not , doe snot chnage their migrant-being. Else you would need to deny that there are floods of Africna migrants swapping over the Mediterranean, on the basis of the argument that most of them never get a visa or need to stay illegally or fight for years until they get a permission in any EU country. Don'T read law books on this issue of what migration and migrants are - read a history book instead.

That you completely ignore even the recent statistical numbers I referred to some posts earlier, I attribute to the intention that you want to paint a certain picture of alöl migrant being highly specilaised and needed. If thgat were true, however, then I wonder why the Green Card initiatives are said to be failures, why German companies complain they do not find many specialists from other countries, and why everybody is wringing his hands over the question how attract more highly trained specilaists. The only thing where you are right is where you said that many nurses and doctors from Eastern Europe (and to lesser degree our Northern and Western neighbours) tend to try Germany, where I would rate nurses not as highly trained personnel, but personnel desperately wanted in Germany. Specilaists would be IT experts, engineers with comparing academical diploma/degrees, and such.

Some people declare almost any low-wage profession a "specialised" job in order to raise acceptance for foreigners coming in to run that job. What that part of the story really is about, that low wage migrants are wanted in germany the same way that low-payed illegal Mexicans are tolerated (while not loved) in America. In Germany, even such lkow wage migrantion is a migration into the social security systems, becasue the difefrences in loans and the money needed for a living, are compensated by the state - the German tax payers. Not all low wage workers get these compensations. But more than enough. In can argue all day whether the state should do that or not, but one thing I do not argue aboiut: that at least we should be clever enough top prevent additioonal migration into these systems, by foreigners from other countries. I remind of the recent debate in Germany and between Germany and the EU over Brussel'S original demand that any foerigner coming to Germany should be subject to Germn wellfare payments. Which is a lunacy of crippling costs for the already massively looted German tax payers, with most of German employees already being stolen more than half of their income so that politicians can redistribute it in the way they see best fit to support their career chances and to strengthen the basis of the system's power and control.

Edit: just in - more highly trained specialists trying to reach Europe:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/marokko-fluechtlinge-stuermen-spanische-exklave-ceuta-mehrere-tote-a-951859.html

[Skybird]

Addendum: Just in. Social court in German y rules that Spanish family must be payed German wellfare although Germn laws rule that out. Judge says German law "probably" is not in line with EU law, that's why.

http://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/sozialleistungen-fuer-eu-auslaender-deutsches-gericht-gewaehrt-spanischen-arbeitslosen-hartz-iv/9441424.html

What he implies and what the EU demands is that any stranger can come to Germany and can start to sack German tax money for nothing from all beginning on.

Thank God there is no such thing like this maliciously so-called poverty migration. And no incentives to increases it.

And even if it were like that - we have all that money, don't we? What meaning has an implicit debt rate of 500-800% of the yearly BSP (=GDP), after all? Answer: none! If we need money to pay all these follies, we just print some more! :yeah:

Ludwig Erhard would turn in his grave. Well, socialists would have loved to have burnt him alive anyway.

[Tribesman]

Nicely deceiving. List some single cases, and declare a rule on their basis. Ignore the huge numbers. :yeah:

Yet it skewers you completely, one single case would be enough to rubbish your argument.
Its safe to say there will be dozens of individuals on just this forum who are living proof that your claim is false.
That's the problem with trying to make your claim seem stronger than it is.
Avoid absolutes.
If you start with a claim that is very obviously and undeniably false then any argument you want to build on that foundation is suspect.

[MH]

Migration always means poverty migration, not wealth migration It mostly does yet very often the poor people can be skilled or educated and looking for better life.
This kind usually don't end up begging or committing crimes.
Every country should have right to be choosy on this issue.

[the_tyrant]

You know what, I would say that in the context of EU migration, where there are no limits, Skybird's argument makes a bit more sense, the vast majority of migrants are not rich, educated, etc.

Maybe Skybird would be happier with the Canadian system, where immigrants are evaluated by a points system. Potential immigrants are evaluated with a points system, and would only be admitted if they "pass"

My parents moved to Canada after my dad had a successful business in China (+ points for net worth and wealth), both knew how to speak English (+ points for language), both have post graduate degrees (+ points for education).

In effect, the system is designed to admit the top few percentile of people who would like to move to Canada.

Nowadays, if you want to immigrate to Canada, these are the requirements:

The Federal Investor program is passive in nature and requires an investment of $800,000 CAD which is deposited with the Receiver General of Canada and a personal net worth of $1.6 Million CAD with two years of suitable management or business experience. The investment bears no interest and must be maintained for five years. Applicants may state a desire to live anywhere in Canada except Quebec. The investment is government guaranteed and the proceeds are allocated to the Provinces excluding Quebec.


Or you need to get 67 points in the skilled worker evaluation system:

http://www.immigration.ca/index.php/en/who-qualifies-for-canadian-immigration-under-the-skilled-worker-program#skilledworkergrid

Hey Skybird, why don't you come over here!:O:

[MH]

You know what, I would say that in the context of EU migration, where there are no limits, Skybird's argument makes a bit more sense, the vast majority of migrants are not rich, educated, etc.


Yep
This seems to be issue there , the reason why EU got flooded and is in trouble.

[Skybird]

Point is, while people have the right to ask in other places - where there already are established communities - whether these communities would accept them to move in and live there, NOBODY has the right to move somewhere and simply demand to be accepted there (if that place already is occupied by another community). You cannot slam in the door somewhere, storm the house and demand the housekeeper: "Here I am, you have to live with it, now get me fed." So, said community has any right to weigh the question of the foreigner, to set conditions, and to ask what the newcomer can and will attribute to said community something that the community values sufficiently to accept a foreigner in. And said community also has any right there is to accept foreigners - OR NOT.

A community therefore has any right to be choosy and let people in that it needs or wants, and reject those it cannot need by their professions and different or lacking skills and talents. There is no claim to make that you go somewhere and then demand the locals to pay for your presence and care for your needs. You are allowed to ask - and them are allowed to say Yes or No. The place already is theirs, not yours, they make the rules, not you.

That any foreigner from any part of Europe has any claim to make for social welfare payments in any other EU country, is idiocy. It rejects reason and sanity, and illustrates the EU megalomaniac craving for recognition as the ultimate centralised reign over 500 million people who as subjects to the state's ultimate authority and power should have as much control over this tyranny as Soviet citizens had over decision making and power in the central committee - none.

Funny that right now I just read it again in a science fiction novel, Frank Herbert's third Dune novel, Children of Dune (edited: this is the original English version):

Chapter 28
Governments, if they endure, always tend increasingly toward aristocratic forms.
No government in history has been known to evade this pattern. And as the
aristocracy develops, government tends more and more to act exclusively in the
interests of the ruling class - whether that class be hereditary royalty,
oligarchs of financial empires, or entrenched bureaucracy.

Written 1975. Sounds like 100% Hoppe in 2001. :) In a debate, a long lasting debate with UnderseaLanceCorporal several years ago, I said the same.

[Tribesman]

It all sounds a bit Tubbs and Edward.:haha:

[Oberon]

This is a local country for local people....

[Aktungbby]

The title you used makes a definition that migration always means poverty migration, not wealth migration, and yet this is not the case.
:sign_yeah:
Precisely! I give le cause celébrée: M. Gérard Depardieu, lately of France. http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/jan/04/gerard-depardieu-club-russian-citizens

[TarJak]

This is a local country for local people....LOL I think they tried that in Germany once before. Didn't turn out too well because someone thought there wasn't enough raum in Germany for the Germans to leben.

[MH]

LOL I think they tried that in Germany once before. Didn't turn out too well because someone thought there wasn't enough raum in Germany for the Germans to leben.

Thats the reason why germans also should not grow mustache and wear funny hats.
Give them that and they all want to rule the world.

[Dan D]

@MH

You said that every country should have a right to be choosy on this issue (immigration policy).

Then you said that it seems to you that the concept of "EU migration, where there are no limits" is the reason why the EU got "flooded "and has problems.

Does that mean that you think that it is the EU that is violating the sovereingty of it members in this context?

I have done a quick research and I have found as result that with regard to legal immigration, each EU-member state has a veto-right on EU level (principle of unanimity), while concerning illegal immigration and asylum a qualified majority is sufficient on EU level. It is a declared goal of all EU member states to jointly fight illegal migration to make it more efficient.

The fact that the German law about EU free movement is called „EU/Freizügigkeitsgesetz“ tells me that EU law was passed into national law.

So Germany could have vetoed the freedom of movement legislation on EU level which it did not do and the EU law passed the German parliament.

The EU does not get flooded by the freedom of movement for citizens who live in EU member states. The EU concept of EU free movement is this:

EU is first of all about a „common market“. A founding principle of the common market is the principle of freedom of movement of workers. It is an economic concept.

So the right of freedom of movement based on work goes along with the right to reside where you work and with the right to remain there once you get retired. Then your pensions can be transferred there, if you wish so. Even your social benefits can be transferred from your home to your host country. So e.g. an Irishman can receive Irish social benefits in Germany.

But if that money runs out and the Irishman applies for German social benefits, he no longer holds the right of free movement on the basis of work, as it is based on work, and has to leave the country if he can't find new work.

In practise: a e.g. Dutch construction company will offers jobs to German construction workers in East German Employment Offices, if they can't find enough construction workers on the Dutch labour market.

In the past you needed a working permit and a residence permit, now you get a single permit. Makes things easier for workers, less administration effort, which is the purprose behind the EU coordination of the labour markets.

The EU right to free movement is limited as it is based on work. If the EU gets flooded by workers, that must be a good sign.

[MH]

The is a lot of debate on thisit seems.
Some might be purely political to gets votes but associating every politician who touches this issue as some sort of nationalist or right wing votes beggar who crossed to the dark side is getting boring.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2514713/Germany-France-join-PM-benefit-tourism-crackdown.html

[Oberon]

Of course there is a lot of debate on this, it's one of the easiest subjects to stir up because it preys on the most basic human fear of change and uncertainty. Stranger danger, and what is more strange than someone from a different country? A different language, a different colour?

Xenophobia is a dangerous thing, and can lead to dark places. :nope: Be it based on nationality, race, or religion.

My primary problem with the lead article in this thread is the sweeping generalisations it makes, in fact the title of this thread itself is a sweeping generalisation in its assumption that the only form of migration is 'poverty migration', when it has been acknowledged by virtually everyone in this thread, including Skybird, that this is in fact untrue.

There are many types of migration, and many reasons, at this time I would wager that by size, the biggest cause of migration is conflict. Particularly in the Middle East and East Africa. Right now, some two million Syrians are displaced in the surrounding nations, I doubt very much that Syrians go to Lebanon for the Lebanese social security payment plans, and the two hundred thousand in Iraq are definitely not there to claim on the Iraqi healthcare system.

Skybird himself hits the nail on the head when he says:

The greek and Spanish young people moving from their homelands to Germany currently - are they really that happy to leave their homes and seek a chance in a foreign place - or aren't they do it because they see no chance for a life in their home countries?

That is exactly the problem, the Push and Pull factors of migration, well documented in any geography class (or at least, certainly well documented back when I was doing GCSE and A Level Geography) are tilted at the moment so that certain nations within Europe have a great Pull factor, and other nations have a great Push factor. Germany has a good Pull factor in its economy, and Greece has a push factor in exactly the same reason. If Greece was as economically sound as Germany, the level of migration would be drastically reduced, it is for that reason, as well as good political propaganda, that Germany keeps bailing out Greece, because if the Greek economy were to completely collapse, no amount of border control would keep out the migrants that would flood into Germany seeking a better life.
It is exactly the same reason why China props up North Korea, because if North Korea collapsed, the flood of Koreans across the Chinese border would completely screw the Chinese economy.

Let's face it, you can build walls, you can man these walls with machine guns, you can patrol it with drones and attack helicopters...people will still get through, look at East and West Germany, how many people died trying to cross the German border, because they wanted to escape to a better life, and how many people succeeded. You can slow the flow down, but you can't stop it, unless you tackle the problem at the source.

[MH]

You can slow the flow down, but you can't stop it, unless you tackle the problem at the source. Slowing down the flow might be important part of solution.
Setting up migration policy based on needs of given country might be part of solution as well.
Certain skills education.

Of course there is a lot of debate on this, it's one of the easiest subjects to stir up because it preys on the most basic human fear of change and uncertainty. Stranger danger, and what is more strange than someone from a different country? A different language, a different colour?
Is just about this?
Is it just about this and not crime and poverty it brings to some towns.
There is this issue of social benefits which seem ridiculous.
Dont forget that some people have to live with this ...its not some political or ethical issue for them.

It funny to watch how those liberal? policies strengthen the radical right.
Not really funny but you know what i mean.

[Skybird]

And still, Oberon: the major, dominant, almost o,mnipresent drive behind migration is not marrying a partner from a different nation, wealth you want to spent in travelling, and curiosity alone: but poverty. The bad living conditions at home. The inability to get a job at home. The hope to have a less miserable life somewhere else. And historically, it never has been any different. The need is what drives people, not the boredom from luxury one already has.

[Oberon]

Slowing down the flow might be important part of solution.

Is just about this?
Is it just about this and not crime and poverty it brings to some towns.
Dont forget that some people have to live with this ...its not some political or ethical issue for them.

It funny to watch how those liberal? policies strengthen the radical right.
Not really funny but you know what i mean.

I can't disagree, cutting down the 'pull' factor would help as part of a concentrated campaign focusing on 'Push' and 'Pull' factors, however it's got to be carefully managed so that you don't cut off your own nose to spite your face, to use a proverb. A lot of the British governments responses to immigration have been primarily related to internal politics and the unexpected popularity of UKIP, and as such the responses have been mainly knee-jerk in nature. Fortunately UKIP are doing a pretty good job of sinking their own ship (or, if one were to take a more conspiratorial tone, there has conveniently for the Conservatives been a sudden outpouring and promotion of radicalist nonsensical UKIP statements, gay rain for example) but they've done enough to spook the Conservatives who are looking towards the next election.

There are also social issues to consider in large areas of migration, yes, but it would be unfair and untrue to label every migrational area as a hotbed of crime. I recall in the London Riots, a group of West-Indian men banding together to protect their street from the troubles.
Basically, it's more down to human nature and behaviour than it is down to migration itself.

And still, Oberon: the major, dominant, almost o,mnipresent drive behind migration is not marrying a partner from a different nation, wealth you want to spent in travelling, and curiosity alone: but poverty. The bad living conditions at home. The inability to get a job at home. The hope to have a less miserable life somewhere else. And historically, it never has been any different. The need is what drives people, not the boredom from luxury one already has.

:hmmm:

I see where you're coming from here, a rather broad definition of poverty, but not an inaccurate one, however in the context of the opening post of this thread, the poverty you refer to was much more specific, focusing on financial rather than living conditions (although it could be argued that the two go hand in hand).
That being said, I do admit, you have a good point, certainly in that definition the most common form of migration is through poverty. However, that is still not an absolute, so one has to always be wary of making them. :03:

[MH]

Human nature is something to be reckoned with when making decisions on this scale on social/economic engineering.
The EU is pulling too hard.

[TarJak]

This thread should have been titled Poverty causes migration. Duh! Of course it does. Why live in a sewer when there's some stairs to the street? Why live in the street when there's some doors to houses to walk through? Being an opportunistic ape, mankind will always try to migrate from worse conditions to better conditions if they see advantage in it and see a way of taking that advantage.

[Tribesman]

This thread should have been titled Poverty causes migration .
Or more accurately titled. "Poverty can cause some migration"

[Tchocky]

I earn about 4x what I was making in Ireland back in 2009. But I didn't migrate because of poverty. Because I wasn't in poverty.

[Dan D]

I used an Irishman as an example because I was thinking of my Irish mate Gerald from (London) Derry. I called him „Jerry“. We played football for some years, each Thursday from 20:00 to 22:00 and we always enjoyed a couple of beers afterwards, he was a midfielder. He made his way to Germany because he fell in love with a German woman. He opened up an Irish pub, which is not a bad idea, because every German town has at least one Irish pub. He went bankrupt with the pub and then he became a public service bus driver wearing a bus driver uniform.
He lost this job because he was barred from driving of any kind of vehicles for one year for illegaly leaving the scene of an accident. Must have been a language problem. Anyway, he had learned carpenter and because the payments in Germany were 6 €/hour at that time working with a firm on a temporary basis, he said „screw you“, I am going back to Ireland where they pay 16€/hour for carpenters.
So he left us (the football team), but showed up again half a year later to play football with us again , sniff, sniff. He told us that he has been working as a bus driver for a company in Ireland which went bankrupt and that had not seen any payments for two months because his boss took all the cash and went mia.

I have lost contact to Jerry and I don't know what he is doing, but I still miss him.

[Tchocky]

Gerald from (London) Derry.

Heh. The only English word with six silent letters :arrgh!:

[Tribesman]

Heh. The only English word with six silent letters :arrgh!:
:har:


But to explore further on the angle you and Dan D opened and show the OP to be completely false.
Take your average townland in a village on the West Coast.
Removing of course all the French Germans and Americans who fled their local poverty in their homeland to move to the bleak wastelands of the Connemara Gaeltacht, looking only at the locals you see that some have local wealth, others have local poverty, then you have the variety of locals wealth which came from Nairobi, Aberdeen, Jedda, Singapore, Sydney, Osaka, Dusseldorf, Utrecht, Boston, NY, Toronto, Wellington, London, Cardiff, Durban, Alexandria, Mumbai.......
Migration is a two way street and has about as many reasons as there are migrants.

[MH]

http://cita.disability.uiuc.edu/presentations/office2web/ppttoweb-02212007_files/images/image15.png