Migration always means poverty migration, not wealth migration

[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.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by 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.

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?

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.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Oberon

The title you used makes a definition that migration always means poverty migration, not wealth migration, and yet this is not the case.

Precisely! I give le cause celébrée: M. Gérard Depardieu, lately of France. http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013...ssian-citizens