Well okay since the whole European Constitution thread turned out to be a thread about immigrations be or not to be. So I thought that this thread was un-avoidable. I didn't do a poll to this thread since the question can be asked in so many different ways. Do you think immigration creates a 'richer' society? Or are you one of those that think it's evil? Or maybe you don't like it alot, but since we don't produce enough children, we HAVE to let people from other parts of the world to get in to your country? My personal opinion is that we should be VERY restrective with immigration. I live in Sweden, and we have some immigrantas here, and I'm not a big fan of them. They don't have a job, many of them goes on wealthfare. They are responsible for alot of crimes, they want have speciall rules due to their religion (that Sweden thank God haven't responded to very much) etc etc. The only positive thing I can see is that they bring their good food here:) To compare with e.g UK, immigrants don't get jobs here due to the fact that they don't have Swedish names. Even if they have an medical doctor education for 8 years, the chanses for them to get a job like that in Sweden is very little. Stupid? Maybe. There have bin alot of discussions here in Sweden that alot of 'well-educated' immigrants move to the UK, because they can have a job there. What do you guys think? Are they a asset or are they a burden? My answer = burden! Ps: I guess this question are for those of us that lives in the Western world, since I don't think the 'rest' of the world have those problems; atleast not in the same way as we have.
Well, there's good and bad people in every region on Earth. I'm from Canada, and most of my country is made up of immigrants (essentially, only the Aboriginals have been here the longest, and even they have not been here since time began). Things work out here just fine. Hasn't every nation had people come from other regions, at some point?
Just to clearafie.....I'm talking about immigration done the last 15 years.
Okay. Well, do you have any evidence that the majority of immigrants sit on Welfare and do nothing, or is this just some variety of xenophobia?
Q: Why do immigrants stay on the dole?
A: Because they generally have less education, poor language skills, low technical skills, larger families, many disadvantages. They are passed over for any worthwhile job because of this. Then European socialist systems subsidize their lack of work, and so many choose they prefer that configuration.
Here is my solution to the problem: (note: this is about immigrants, not refugees.)
1. (This is mostly for America) Border Control. We cannot fix immigration until we know who we're fixing. In countries where the borders are well-controlled or generally not used for immigration, no biggie. Here, however, the borders need to be patrolled actively. Either a., we adopt a large, non-violent force that rounds up immigrants and takes them to processing stations, or b., we shoot intruders on sight. I prefer a., but we can do b. too. Either way, the point is
2. Issue visas to all immigrants not qualified for citizenship. These visas have an valid period of 5 years. All visas have an information chip, hardwired to activate every year after visa receipt or if tampered with. Activation of the chip requires the immigrant to report to an Immigration Service station within 30 days of activation. During this time, the immigrant will be evaluated on the criteria below.
3. Training: Require all immigrants to:
a. Have a basic grasp of (one of) the primary language(s) of the country. If they are not fluent, they are required to attend a language course in which they must prove fluency within 4 years of visa receipt. Failure to attend a majority of a year's classes or failure to graduate within 4 years means instant deportation.
b. Have a high school/secondary school-equivalent education, including a passable understanding of national/consitutional law and national history. Alternatively, they must enroll in and pass a GED-type course within 3 years of visa receipt. Failure to attend a majority of a year's classes or failure to graduate within 3 years means instant deportation.
4. Employment: Immigrants are not required to have jobs in order to qualify for citizenship. If they get a job, they must present a valid visa to the employer, adn the employer must notify the Immigration Service within 60 days of employment. Failure to do so will result in: First Offense: Business fined US$15000 per illegal employee Second Offense: Business fined $50000 per illegal employee Third and Subsequent Offenses: Business fined $200000 per illegal employee and the head of the business, such as the owner or the CEO, will be incarcerated for at least 2 years, with a maximum of 10 years. The immigrant must also notify the Immigration Service within 60 days of employment. Failure to do so will result in: First Offense: 60 Days jail, 1 year of house arrest Second Offense: Immediate Deportation Immigrants' incomes will be monitored during the visa period to ensure compliance. Alternatively, though I don't support it, businesses' payroll records could be monitored for evidence for illegal employment.
5. Citizenship. Upon the completion of section 3, immigrants must swear or affirm allegiance to their new country. Upon doing so , they will be considered national citizens, issued Social Security cards/whatever other countries have cards for, and have the same requirements as any other citizen. Also, all comprehensive records pertaining to their visa period will be reviewed for accuracy and then destroyed, with only notes on date of visa receipt and date of citizenship retained.
I believe this is the plan that best protects a given country while giving immigrants a chance to succeed. Comments?
I take what n0e says way too seriously
12th March 2004
LuddendorfJust to clearafie.....I'm talking about immigration done the last 15 years.
And in what way does that differ from earlier immigrants?
I think he just means immigration from within the last cycle of immigration (immigration from poor and undeveloped countries into the West).
Moof, I generally agree. I'm not sure about 1. but 2,3,4,5. sound reasonable, if a little on the strict side. Anyway, I think that if immigrants are able to work, they should; there's no reason for them not to, and so there should be language courses and plenty of training programs avaliable so they can enter the work force. PS: what about adding a 2b. rule regarding immigrants with criminal records? Or do you think they should be automatically denied a visa?
1. is a necessary evil. The rest are strict because they have to be.
Immigrants with criminal records would be allowed visas, except in cases of first-degree murder.
Pirate vs Ninja who will win
18th March 2005
I feel that plan would work. You would have to ensure that employees in the immigrant department are cold ruthless bastards so they don't fall for every sad story thats thrown at them. Other than that it sounds like it would work great.