It's more complicated than that. European politicians (outside of the UK) actually tend to be better than US ones on immigration. The US has been dealing with shit immigration policy (including many backstabbers who run on changing and then don't) for decades on in.
You're the most well-informed person here, as usual - though in Europe we have also dealt with politicians who run on decreasing immigration and then either do nothing or increase it.
Relying on a politician's moral compass to not backstab you is generally a loser's game. You have to be able to punish and force (legally, and all that) a politician for breaking his promises in that way, and because anti-immigration is a populist position (that of ordinary people, the 'poorly educated', who have disproportionately little political influence), that does not happen.
The Dutch government just collapsed because the 'center-right' PM, who has let in more immigrants than any other despite always promising to reduce them, had to make a show of pretending to oppose immigration, and his coalition partners wouldn't even agree to that. Gotta say, I didn't expect that to happen in Europe.
The American right talks so much shit about Europe, but I wish we could disrupt government coalitions like that or mobilize on the street like the French.
Depends. Do your far-leftists want to crack down on illegal immigrants while promoting work permits? Because Trump's position was always that he wants no illegal immigration but instead wants legal immigration.
European politics are just different. On economic issues, our right-wingers are like your Bernie Sanders. On immigration, it is different. Even European left-wing governments have cracked down on immigration, like Sweden in 2015. "Mainstream right-wing" parties are often owned by corporate interests like the GOP, and unfortunately, Meloni has been acting like one of those rather than a true populist.
To quote our favorite user here, she indeed is a TRAITOR.
So wait are they focused on stopping the illegal migrants but are doing the arab thing or having worker contracts where they'll work them to the bone then send them back when they are done with them?
Cause fair play if that's the case, is it exploitative, yes. Do Arab states not have an issue with race baiters and foreign grifters because of those policies, yes.
The arabs can exploit the foreigners because they have strong in-group preference and strength is seen in a positive light. Yeeting work permit immigrants is just business as usual.
In the West however, implementing a program like that will open the gates because of empathy and pity and media focus. Journos will rearrange a child's corpse to get a better picture...you think they won't hunt for the most pathetic, pitiful "guest worker" to run several pieces on so that you can open the gates again?
The only sustainable solution is zero migration, repatriation, and incentives for young indigenous couples to have children (i.e. actual italians).
It's got nothing to do with 'empathy' and everything to do with interest.
'Empathy' is the moron's reason for supporting this sort of thing, just like Ukraine being 'free and democratic' is the dumb person's reason for supporting the NATO proxy war there.
Those in charge have neither empathy, nor do they believe in freedom or democracy (not even the fictional kind).
True, the European don't have the same callousness that the Arabs can have, even Roman slavery was more humane than Arab mass castration.
Europe is better doing a Japanese model of extremely tough immigration requirements with a North Korean border security while focusing more on in-house training of citizens with more focus on robotics and AI for automation.
Liberal priors are dead and dying. I don't care if it's discrimination, I don't care if it's not universal, I don't care if it prefers one group over another.
An italian policy doesn't have to account for all people, neither should an english policy, or a zimbabwean policy. No one embargoed Mugabe after he yeeted people just for deficient melanin, no one complained that it's not "fair" for everyone.
Take your universalist hot-takes back to the academy. Parochialism will return by vote or collapse.
You are again falling for the "universalist" background of current lawmaking. If poor losers are the recipients of our proposed incentive, then we ban them.
"You can't do that!" Yes we can, worse laws have been passed for less.
"You'll be giving money to the middle class! They don't need it!" I don't care. If they are the ones best positioned to have children who'll succeed then they get the bag.
Consider some homeschooling laws in the States. You get a yearly stipend if you homeschool. Can the impoverished single mother take the cash and devote all the time to filling out forms for refunds for lessons, materials, etc.?
No, it's the married middle class woman, often religious, who has enough free time to plan the lessons, deal with the government program for refunds, etc.
"That's not fair for poor people!" I don't care. They get free surgery and I get boned for 200 dollars everytime I go for a yearly checkup despite losing 40% of my income to taxes. Sounds fair to me.
They mentioned a "recovery plan" that the Bank of Italy is part of, and I'm betting that if she doesn't meet some basic criteria, the Italians won't be getting millions of German dollars.
The Bank of Italy has also warned that a serious shortage of skilled workers, including in construction and IT, was threatening Italy’s ability to carry out its ambitious €200bn EU-funded post-pandemic recovery plan.
The state bank is probably part of this scheme where the EU will funnel a bajillion dollars to them if they stay within the "recovery plan" guidelines.
North African migrants are very likely not going to have skilled labor, but I'll bet the Indian and Chinese migrants will probably qualify.
Not optimal, but Italy is probably financially ruinous, because it's run by Italians, so they probably need the money in that "plan". I'm not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Indian and Pakistanis most likely but that is still shit. Selling the future of your country for EU money without a fallback. They also have high youth unemployment yet they are not encouraging them to get jobs.
They would also need to assign a lot of restrictions to the immigrants, like a maximum of 2 years of work and then proof of leaving the EU or be considered a felon. Out a carrot on the stick, like they can return after a year.
Trump put immigration on the back burner to do tax cuts then blamed Democrats for not getting shit done. Republicans had both houses of Congress early in his term and left with nothing to show on immigration.
I know. I would give him more credit if he went on a crusade against the shitty GOPers. He did go after them a little but then pivoted to blaming Dems. When he only blames Dems, he runs cover for shitty elements of the GOP.
They also failed to get national reciprocity or to do anything about restoring the second amendmant, but that's par for the course with controlled opposition.
Isn't the cliche line that European politics are so far Left that our "extreme Leftists" are still mid right to them?
At this point, I just expect any "far Right" European politician to just be the one asking for lube before the Globohomo ass fucks them.
It's more complicated than that. European politicians (outside of the UK) actually tend to be better than US ones on immigration. The US has been dealing with shit immigration policy (including many backstabbers who run on changing and then don't) for decades on in.
You're the most well-informed person here, as usual - though in Europe we have also dealt with politicians who run on decreasing immigration and then either do nothing or increase it.
Relying on a politician's moral compass to not backstab you is generally a loser's game. You have to be able to punish and force (legally, and all that) a politician for breaking his promises in that way, and because anti-immigration is a populist position (that of ordinary people, the 'poorly educated', who have disproportionately little political influence), that does not happen.
Yep, and in general, Europe is better at doing that (again, aside from the UK).
The Dutch government just collapsed because the 'center-right' PM, who has let in more immigrants than any other despite always promising to reduce them, had to make a show of pretending to oppose immigration, and his coalition partners wouldn't even agree to that. Gotta say, I didn't expect that to happen in Europe.
The American right talks so much shit about Europe, but I wish we could disrupt government coalitions like that or mobilize on the street like the French.
Depends. Do your far-leftists want to crack down on illegal immigrants while promoting work permits? Because Trump's position was always that he wants no illegal immigration but instead wants legal immigration.
European politics are just different. On economic issues, our right-wingers are like your Bernie Sanders. On immigration, it is different. Even European left-wing governments have cracked down on immigration, like Sweden in 2015. "Mainstream right-wing" parties are often owned by corporate interests like the GOP, and unfortunately, Meloni has been acting like one of those rather than a true populist.
To quote our favorite user here, she indeed is a TRAITOR.
At this point, EU left is not further left then the US left but the EU right is not that far off left. Not even sure if there is any right as in US.
So wait are they focused on stopping the illegal migrants but are doing the arab thing or having worker contracts where they'll work them to the bone then send them back when they are done with them?
Cause fair play if that's the case, is it exploitative, yes. Do Arab states not have an issue with race baiters and foreign grifters because of those policies, yes.
It's still a trojan horse.
The arabs can exploit the foreigners because they have strong in-group preference and strength is seen in a positive light. Yeeting work permit immigrants is just business as usual.
In the West however, implementing a program like that will open the gates because of empathy and pity and media focus. Journos will rearrange a child's corpse to get a better picture...you think they won't hunt for the most pathetic, pitiful "guest worker" to run several pieces on so that you can open the gates again?
The only sustainable solution is zero migration, repatriation, and incentives for young indigenous couples to have children (i.e. actual italians).
It's got nothing to do with 'empathy' and everything to do with interest.
'Empathy' is the moron's reason for supporting this sort of thing, just like Ukraine being 'free and democratic' is the dumb person's reason for supporting the NATO proxy war there.
Those in charge have neither empathy, nor do they believe in freedom or democracy (not even the fictional kind).
True, the European don't have the same callousness that the Arabs can have, even Roman slavery was more humane than Arab mass castration.
Europe is better doing a Japanese model of extremely tough immigration requirements with a North Korean border security while focusing more on in-house training of citizens with more focus on robotics and AI for automation.
Liberal priors are dead and dying. I don't care if it's discrimination, I don't care if it's not universal, I don't care if it prefers one group over another.
An italian policy doesn't have to account for all people, neither should an english policy, or a zimbabwean policy. No one embargoed Mugabe after he yeeted people just for deficient melanin, no one complained that it's not "fair" for everyone.
Take your universalist hot-takes back to the academy. Parochialism will return by vote or collapse.
You are again falling for the "universalist" background of current lawmaking. If poor losers are the recipients of our proposed incentive, then we ban them.
"You can't do that!" Yes we can, worse laws have been passed for less.
"You'll be giving money to the middle class! They don't need it!" I don't care. If they are the ones best positioned to have children who'll succeed then they get the bag.
Consider some homeschooling laws in the States. You get a yearly stipend if you homeschool. Can the impoverished single mother take the cash and devote all the time to filling out forms for refunds for lessons, materials, etc.?
No, it's the married middle class woman, often religious, who has enough free time to plan the lessons, deal with the government program for refunds, etc.
"That's not fair for poor people!" I don't care. They get free surgery and I get boned for 200 dollars everytime I go for a yearly checkup despite losing 40% of my income to taxes. Sounds fair to me.
More like they will keep the illegal immigrants and bring sub-saharan africans and pakistanians on top of those.
They mentioned a "recovery plan" that the Bank of Italy is part of, and I'm betting that if she doesn't meet some basic criteria, the Italians won't be getting millions of German dollars.
"far-right" in the EU is just two steps right of stalin instead of one (which is what they consider centrist).
you should be removing non-citizens, not inviting more!
I think I see what happened here:
The state bank is probably part of this scheme where the EU will funnel a bajillion dollars to them if they stay within the "recovery plan" guidelines.
North African migrants are very likely not going to have skilled labor, but I'll bet the Indian and Chinese migrants will probably qualify.
Not optimal, but Italy is probably financially ruinous, because it's run by Italians, so they probably need the money in that "plan". I'm not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Indian and Pakistanis most likely but that is still shit. Selling the future of your country for EU money without a fallback. They also have high youth unemployment yet they are not encouraging them to get jobs. They would also need to assign a lot of restrictions to the immigrants, like a maximum of 2 years of work and then proof of leaving the EU or be considered a felon. Out a carrot on the stick, like they can return after a year.
He's back!
On immigration, the West has been backed stabbed countless times by men as well including Reagan and Trump.
Trump put immigration on the back burner to do tax cuts then blamed Democrats for not getting shit done. Republicans had both houses of Congress early in his term and left with nothing to show on immigration.
You are correct, but to be fair, even if he wanted to, getting it through the corporate-owned GOP Congress would have been close to impossible.
I know. I would give him more credit if he went on a crusade against the shitty GOPers. He did go after them a little but then pivoted to blaming Dems. When he only blames Dems, he runs cover for shitty elements of the GOP.
Last I checked he blamed the neocons too.
They also failed to get national reciprocity or to do anything about restoring the second amendmant, but that's par for the course with controlled opposition.
When I've seen the article I thought about you warning us about her. At least she did not push for more feminism, yet.
High increase in male population, overtime will lead to "sexual assault" that in turn will lead to "a need" for extra rights for women.
Heeeey, it's the Imp! I was beginning to wonder if you'd dropped off the face of the earth!
missed u bb