Europe has proven we can’t fix this by importing millions of unskilled people with radically different values. The social unrest is proving catastrophic. Rightwing parties are gaining traction in almost every European country. The EU is on track to accept more than a million applications this year alone, and most of them have large families which will be granted reunification. Data shows most of them will never work a day in their lives. Our social systems will collapse within a decade at this rate. We’ll be lucky if the EU itself survives this.
Instead, we really need to alleviate the issues resulting in young people not having kids. The usual argument is, “it’s too expensive.” While true, data shows that income isn’t a barrier to fertility. In fact, higher income results in lower fertility, with some exceptions at the very top end of the income spectrum.
As a German, I call bullshit. Every asylum seeker I’ve met either had a job/went to school or was denied a job because the application didn’t go through yet. I’m sure there are people out there who don’t want to work, but please show me the data which shows that “most of them will never work a day in their lives”. Your comment sounds EXACTLY like the rhetorics of the same right-wing you pretend to condemn.
As a German, I call bullshit.
As a Dane, I call bullshit. Show me the stats. Here are ours. Syrian migrants have an employment rate of under 20%. Somali immigrants are under 30%. As you can tell by the same link, their crime rate is astronomical.
As someone from a country where the AfD gains increasing popularity on an almost daily basis, calling “bullshit” rings completely hollow. You clearly have no idea how bad things have become for your average countryman.
Yes it doesn’t work if you make it impossible or very hard for it to work. I’m obviously not perfectly sure but for the amount of refugees we have both in Germany and likely Denmark, especially now with Ukraine we spend way to little money on the process of integration, if there’s not enough (language) schools, shitty temporary housing and unhelpful and uncooperative Ausländerbehörden, we shouldn’t turn to blaming the people who come here for the problems we in the “West” largely created.
Blaming and viliviying Somali and Syrian migrants just gets us increasingly deeper into this rabbit hole, until at the end of the day you have fundamentalist or ethnic riots, or firing squads at the outside borders. Both is completely unworkable, incredibly more expensive and frankly inhumane.
The conservatives that think human rights are a good thing should get their head out of fantasy land, the crusty socdems should ask themselves how they let this shit happen, and yeah the afd isn’t gonna fix it but closing the borders as they demand is the most stupid non solution ever, just letting the thing heat up there on the outskirts until it blows up in all of our faces. Which it will continue to as long as no one takes it seriously enough to actually make a good solution. But relying on the publics generosity and frankly Kafkaesque government regulation and support isn’t gonna get you well integrated migrants in a generation, it takes 3 maybe 5 in that case. Which is what we’ve been doing.
We don’t have enough houses and schools for everyone as is. If you’re saying we need even more, no one is arguing with you. We’re arguing that, given reality, adding more unskilled and illiterate migrants makes all of our problems much worse.
You argue that protecting the border is impossible, and I couldn’t disagree more. Countries have been successfully protecting their borders for millennia. If you’re arguing that Germany just happens to be the most incompetent country in all of history, I strongly disagree. This is only a matter of political will. It’s only a matter of time until AfD is elected, because successive governments have refused to protect the border. When they’re in power, they’ll reduce the refugee quota to zero and expel everyone who illegally immigrated. Then they’ll restrict migration from countries from which migrants are overrepresented in crime and unemployment. People will cheer.
Germany (and most Western countries) have a few short years to make realistic concessions to their people before AfD and other far right parties take charge entirely. Decide if you want compromise, or the worst possible outcome. Those are your only choices right now.
In this same reality it’s also still more expensive, logistically difficult and just again inhumane. If the afd is getting close to taking charge entirely, I’ll take my bike to France to learn how to make the polices job a living hell. Just resigning to stupid outdated thinking doesn’t seem particularly appealing to me.
Sure some might cheer when they start to push that hard against immigration. Others will riot and burn the streets even worse than they do already. Because for example we believe having such a thing as universal human rights is a good idea.
Because completely counter to whatever you think about defending borders countries have for literal time immemorial tried and failed to gain advantage or prevent each other from doing so by military force. It’s been catastrophic every single time. Or are the Greeks Romans, Chinese kingdoms, Nazis, Soviets, still here with us today, did they have a graceful and good end to their reign.
The choice you present is false both options will inevitably end in the decline of the West, one just might be faster than the other. But there is in theory at least better alternatives, they just require Europeans to stop being US lapdogs. And letting go of the thousands of years old doctrine of military and economic domination, that creates most of its own problems to begin with.
And those anxious and xenophobic motherfuckers gonna live for sooo much longer than their parents. They easily gonna leech from my salary for the next two decades while I will certainly not get a dime from the generations after me. That generation lived of the wealth of the generations before them AND after them.
And that’s why conservatives get elected. And since more and more young vote for right-wing parties we’re in for a real shitshow.
Yeah. To be honest most liberal and social democrat governments are playing right into the hands of the right wing too.
Too afraid to crack down on the far right, but still too conservative to commit to large public spending on housing and sustainable infrastructure. Or in Germany’s case, nuclear energy.
I have hope for those organzing outside of electoralism, those organzing within it in the West are in for another rude wake up call soon. They keep ignoring them.
Westerners are not more tolerant or intolerant then any other people on earth, we generally just have higher standards of living as a result of economic and military hegemony. As that continues to decline for more and more previously " wealthy " people the fascist radiclization will get worse in the West.
We need new ways of living and bold ideas. The far right nor neoliberals can offer that to people. Liberals will tolerate dissidents but they will never take meaningful action on the issiues of class, the military industrial complex or encomcis for the most part. It needs to change from the outside in.
Or in Germany’s case, nuclear energy.
You know that not even the former operators of the German nuclear power plants are in favour of going back to nuclear? Even if we decide NOW to invest in nuclear power again on a grand scale - which makes no sense at all economically - it won’t help the energy transition, because planning and construction takes decades and is irrational in terms of costs. However, I agree with you that it was a strategic mistake on the part of the former Merkel government not to shut down coal-fired power plants first but to shut nuclear - but this does not change the current path dependencies of the German energy sector at all!
For decades German politicians have used the excuse that it takes many years to build nuclear. If they had started decades ago, Germany would have a dozen plants now and have no energy woes. Instead we now see a huge proportion of Germany’s energy generated by coal and lignite. Get off the anti-science train and join us in the 21st century. Nuclear is safe, plentiful, and green.
This doesn’t mean they shouldn’t invest in other forms of energy too. Energy grids require diversification, and concurrent leaders have been asleep at the wheel.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not a fundamental opponent of nuclear power, but I would like to point out that at this point in time I think we can achieve our goal of an emission-free energy sector faster and more cost-efficiently if we focus our political, regulatory and economic efforts entirely on the development and scale up of renewable energy and storage technologies - not to mention the fact that the supply chain for uranium (Russia, Niger, China, Kazakhstan, etc) and the security of supply with sufficient cooling water are by no means secure at present and in times of worsening climate change…
Apart from that, nuclear power plants cannot be shut down fast enough and are therefore not realy compatible with an energy mix that is largely based on renewables…
Germany’s strategy of going all-in on LNG has been a colossal failure, and I do not believe going all-in on any other energy sources is wise. Diversification of energy grids is almost always the best strategy, as it mitigates risks which are as yet unforeseen. Let’s build wind and solar, but let’s also build nuclear. Worst case scenario Germany has lots of clean energy.
not to mention the fact that the supply chain for uranium (Russia, Niger, China, Kazakhstan, etc) and the security of supply with sufficient cooling water are by no means secure at present and in times of worsening climate change…
Canada and Australia are #2 and #4 producers of uranium. Uranium mining is extremely distributed, and we have no strategic risk of losing access.
Germany has no climate model which predicts desert-like conditions. Even if there were, Germany has a large coastline, and could desalinate sea water for cooling.
Apart from that, nuclear power plants cannot be shut down fast enough and are therefore not realy compatible with an energy mix that is largely based on renewables…
We do not shut down nuclear plants. They are not quick-fire generation. They stay in operation indefinitely, and provide stable power during periods of low sun and wind. They make an excellent complement to renewable grids which are subject to high volatility.
Would you like me to list the 300 reasons a fully renewable grid in Germany is currently impossible?
Germany’s strategy of going all-in on LNG has been a colossal failure, and I do not believe going all-in on any other energy sources is wise. Diversification of energy grids is almost always the best strategy, as it mitigates risks which are as yet unforeseen. Let’s build wind and solar, but let’s also build nuclear. Worst case scenario Germany has lots of clean energy.
There is nothing wrong with diversification, but it is always a question of how much bang for the buck you get in the end - especially against the background of the politically explosive debate about electricity prices. The real costs of nuclear power (including risk insurance, etc.) are immense and one must honestly ask oneself what amount of renewable energy one can get on the grid with the same investment in a realistic time. Given that Flamanville, Olkiluoto and Hinkley Point will be / already are all massively over budget, I assume that with the expansion of the trans-European grids (HVDCs) and seasonal storage of green hydrogen, methane, etc. we will probably achieve this goal better and cheaper…
Canada and Australia are #2 and #4 producers of uranium. Uranium mining is extremely distributed, and we have no strategic risk of losing access.
OK, point taken - assuming that their deposits are sufficient for the uranium demand of the whole western world for the next 50-100 years (?), supply may be regarded as secured.
We do not shut down nuclear plants. They are not quick-fire generation. They stay in operation indefinitely, and provide stable power during periods of low sun and wind. They make an excellent complement to renewable grids which are subject to high volatility.
Correct, that is exactly the problem: Without an unconditional feed-in guarantee (i.e. even at times when the nuclear power plants could operate economically on the common European electricity market), no operator would agree to produce nuclear energy. This, in turn, ensures that any power plants that cannot be shut down quickly enough (especially nuclear and coal-fired) have the effect that wind farms, in particular, often have to be taken off the grid. Since this is also connected with compensation payments to the wind power operators, these are external costs of nuclear power which we all (private households and industry) have to pay via our electricity price…
And this is why the retirement ages have to be raised in many countries.
People live longer and fewer young to take care of the old (and the economy in general)
Yea and by the time I get to retirement age it will be pushed so far back that only a handful of people will live long enough to retire anyway. Just work until you die /s
I doubt that will happen.
But raising the retirement age is needed in an ageing population where people just live healthier and longer than ever.
Otherwise an ever increasing amount of people will be retired and the amount of people that can contribute to the economy and well everything really will decrease.
The same problem would arise if the amount of children suddenly started increasing rapidly, fortunately that would likely solve it self after a while since they would eventually work too. We need a balance of workers and non workers otherwise society would collapse.
The only way I can see that being sustainable is if we could automate to the degree that the amount of human workers could be less every year. But that’s not possible yet (if ever).
And no I obviously don’t want the retirement age to increase, I hope to also retire some day. But I see no choice.
But the article said that while people live longer their healthy years don’t increase that much. And that is going to be a problem
Covid 2 electric boogaloo?
2023 is the hottest year ever in record. Everything suggests that it won’t hold that record for long. Why would I bring children to this world to suffer the hell that 2050 will be?
because otherwise who will fix this mess?
Humans are what are causing the mess, and you want to add more of them?
The earth does not care much about climate change, nor about humans. Nature will bounce back eventually. It always did.
Bringing kids into this world, who are educated and adapted will help humanity, not the earth.
