• Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 个月前

    Not dodging. Well if the sole reason is relocating to cities, then the outskirts or far-away-places should be cheap as shit right? Guess what, it’s not different. Prices went up, demand grew, space is still the same.

    I don’t understand why you totally not see a problem with 15% of the population being immigrants that weren’t here before. How can they not be a major part of the problem? And yes, they compete for gov-run grooup-housing. But so do the “natives”.

    Anyhow, be it as it may, i don’t really care (beside profiting from whatever the real reaso is). The next generation will have to deal with it. I didn’t add kids to this world, i have no stake in the future.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 个月前

      No, why would the outskirts be cheaper? The opposite happens as the more affluent move to the suburbs.

      And please look up the actual figure. Refugees are less than 2% of the population in the EU for example. Of course if you identify everyone with generations old immigration background you can reach maybe 15% but those are no less “native” than all the others that move to the cities.

      And no, the refugee “camps” that I politely described as group housing are not open to non-refugees.

      • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 个月前

        Dude. Not one ukrainian is living in said group-housing. I thought you refered to social housing by the gov. But those in the refugee-camps (why so polite, it’s literally what they are) either leave or can stay and occupy another apt.

        Yeah i like your logic. An immigrant being here for a generation stops being one. Okay, whatever. It’s still a +1 that was not supposed to be here.

        But i get it, we taught you long enough these values of diversity and being liberal and open, and now we reap the profits. I’m game.