Mediterranean migrants- specific questions

stringed theory

Lockstep wrote: »

Once again, your entire argument relies on a ridiculous argument: that refugee numbers will remain steady at the current peak rate for the next 85 years.

Might remain. Been there done that.

Lockstep wrote: »

Considering previous arrivals amounted to a fraction of the current number, it's a stretch to say the numbers will continue for the next few years, let alone the next 85..

Typically, you've ignored what I had to say about the recent unprecedented opening of maritime borders by Italy and Greece.

Lockstep wrote: »

If you can produce the slightest shred of evidence to suggest the numbers will remain stable for a sustained period of time, please provide it.

So I have to provide evidence and you don't? The only "evidence" you've provided is statistical, and relates to past events before the opening of Europe's borders. Of course there is no evidence about future migrant flows one way or the other.
But really, to address this issue you have to be able to consider the broad sweep of human history, which includes massive waves of migration. This might help you to escape the mental strait jacket you find yourself in.
In dealing with the future, statistics are not enough.

Lockstep wrote: »

Also, Europe does not have open borders.

Yes, Europe has open borders for people arriving by boat who look Asian or African. None of them are turned back. You knew that already, didn't you?

Lockstep wrote: »

Theoretically, it could happen. But theoretically Germany could declare war on France. It's happened before so it could happen again, for the next 85 years, right?

I think we have reached the end of our discussion. I'm sure you'll have the last word though!

Lockstep

stringed theory wrote: »

Might remain. Been there done that.
Typically, you've ignored what I had to say about the recent unprecedented opening of maritime borders by Italy and Greece.
So I have to provide evidence and you don't? The only "evidence" you've provided is statistical, and relates to past events before the opening of Europe's borders. Of course there is no evidence about future migrant flows one way or the other.
But really, to address this issue you have to be able to consider the broad sweep of human history, which includes massive waves of migration. This might help you to escape the mental strait jacket you find yourself in.
In dealing with the future, statistics are not enough.

If all you can do is bleat that refugee numbers might remain at the current levels for 85 years, then I'm not sure what else I can say here. Current refugee levels are unprecedented. The idea that they'll remain at this level for years, let alone decades has no basis in fact. Only paranoia.
You made a claim: the onus is on you to back it up.

stringed theory wrote: »

Yes, Europe has open borders for people arriving by boat who look Asian or African. None of them are turned back. You knew that already, didn't you?

Have they?
Europe continues to deport people
All Europe is doing is permitting people to arrive and claim asylum. Which is what they've always done. When they fail, they can be deported. Which is what's happening.

Lockstep

gallag wrote: »

What if the numbers double? Or quadruple? Why do you assume the numbers will only go down?

What if they go up by 1000%? What if tomorrow, every single African tries to arrive in Europe?

Given that these numbers are unprecedented, I find it very hard to believe they'll remain steady for a sustained period of time or increase. Previous years saw refugee numbers in the tens, not hundreds of thousands.

Of course, if you've any evidence that refugee numbers will stay like this, please feel free to provide a source.

gallag

Lockstep wrote: »

What if they go up by 1000%? What if tomorrow, every single African tries to arrive in Europe?

Given that these numbers are unprecedented, I find it very hard to believe they'll remain steady for a sustained period of time or increase. Previous years saw refugee numbers in the tens, not hundreds of thousands.

Of course, if you've any evidence that refugee numbers will stay like this, please feel free to provide a source.

And if I had said last year that the current migration crises would happen you would have said..................

Lockstep

gallag wrote: »

And if I had said last year that the current migration crises would happen you would have said..................

Then I'd have asked you what your basis was for claiming this. Unless you had inside knowledge for the WFP funding crisis or something.

View

Before anyone makes assumptions about Africa, it is worth bearing in mind how they are actually doing today:

http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/images/2014/12/blogs/graphic-detail/20150103_gdm200_1.png

fly_agaric

View wrote: »

Before anyone makes assumptions about Africa, it is worth bearing in mind how they are actually doing today:

http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/images/2014/12/blogs/graphic-detail/20150103_gdm200_1.png

That's positive but zero multiplied by any number is still...zero.
I think the Asian tiger would have had double-digit annual growth when their economies were taking off. That's the sort of growth Africa needs to be seeing, especially given its population growth.

jackofalltrades

Lockstep wrote: »

There is certainly a problem with extremists within Europe's Muslim community but this isn't a global problem.

You're having a laugh right? This is a global problem.

And the above passage you quoted doesn't take away from the fact that the US has problems with extremists.

K-9

gallag wrote: »

And if I had said last year that the current migration crises would happen you would have said..................

Then you are assuming that the EU and member countries will do nothing about such an influx. If the current crisis becomes the norm Governments will not be able to take the same numbers in every year, that will be a political reality as shown by France, Hungary and others. Politicians will still face elections and if popular opinion says numbers are becoming a problem then..........

View

fly_agaric wrote: »

That's positive but zero multiplied by any number is still...zero.

Except, of course, Africa's starting point isn't zero since that would mean there was no economic activity of any sort anywhere in Africa. :-)

fly_agaric wrote: »

I think the Asian tiger would have had double-digit annual growth when their economies were taking off. That's the sort of growth Africa needs to be seeing, especially given its population growth.

And parts of Africa are experiencing that sort of growth and will improve accordingly. You know a bit like us having, at last, fast growth and falling unemployment while Greece is still struggling to even begin to get things moving in a positive direction.

View

K-9 wrote: »

Then you are assuming that the EU and member countries will do nothing about such an influx. If the current crisis becomes the norm

It won't. The current crisis is being driven by conflict in countries such as Syria and an unusually high number of such crises around the world. Hence there is little likelihood of such a number of crises continuing on an annual basis over the medium to long term.

kettlehead

View wrote: »

It won't. The current crisis is being driven by conflict in countries such as Syria and an unusually high number of such crises around the world. Hence there is little likelihood of such a number of crises continuing on an annual basis over the medium to long term.

Circa 20% of the "refugees" are Syrian or claim to be. This crisis would have occurred even with the Syrian civil war.

Lockstep

jackofalltrades wrote: »

You're having a laugh right? This is a global problem.

And the above passage you quoted doesn't take away from the fact that the US has problems with extremists.

Well that depends on the country, doesn't it? Different Muslim populations have different levels of extremism.
The source clearly shows that US Muslims are not much of a risk of extremism: they're far wealthier and better integrated than their European counterparts. Especially when the majority of US terrorist attacks are by non-Muslims

Lockstep

kettlehead wrote: »

Circa 20% of the "refugees" are Syrian or claim to be. This crisis would have occurred even with the Syrian civil war.

Actually, it's 52%
Presumably, you're going by the Eurostat statistics, which predate the refugee crisis's peak levels: they only go as far as June, with January-June refugee numbers amounting to just 17% of 2015's total arrivals.

JPNelsforearm

View wrote: »

Before anyone makes assumptions about Africa, it is worth bearing in mind how they are actually doing today:

http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/images/2014/12/blogs/graphic-detail/20150103_gdm200_1.png

Africa is still barely industrialised, until they can industrialise and challenge China and India, it will struggle as a continent.
http://africanarguments.org/2014/05/01/nigerias-economic-transition-reveals-deep-structural-distortions-by-zainab-usman/

View

kettlehead wrote: »

Circa 20% of the "refugees" are Syrian or claim to be. This crisis would have occurred even with the Syrian civil war.

I was referring to actual refugees who make valid claims not to those who claim to be but aren't. We don't have any obligation to the latter once their claims have been fairly processed and (eventually) refused.

jackofalltrades

Lockstep wrote: »

Well that depends on the country, doesn't it? Different Muslim populations have different levels of extremism.

So are you planning to prove that extremism in the Muslim community isn't a global problem?

The source clearly shows that US Muslims are not much of a risk of extremism: they're far wealthier and better integrated than their European counterparts.

"But that's not really a problem for the United States."
So on some level it's a problem and remember this is just a journalists opinion.
Does it show that the US Muslim community doesn't have a problem with extremism. No it doesn't.

View

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Africa is still barely industrialised, until they can industrialise and challenge China and India, it will struggle as a continent.
http://africanarguments.org/2014/05/01/nigerias-economic-transition-reveals-deep-structural-distortions-by-zainab-usman/

I am not saying it is easy for them (just as it wasn't for anyone else). Instead I am pointing out it is happening already and Africa in twenty five years time is likely to be quite different from today, never mind in fifty years time.

We, especially, in Ireland, shouldn't sneer. I once met someone who, as a child of someone who set up a MNC manufacturing plant in the midlands here in the 60s, saw locals all walking a long-ish distance to work in their first month, cycling to work a month later and driving to work a year later. Just as that one manufacturing plant had a big impact here way back then, you can be certain that their African equivalents will have an equally big (or larger) impact there.

View

jackofalltrades wrote: »

So are you planning to prove that extremism in the Muslim community isn't a global problem?

The onus lies with you to prove it is a global problem, not on others to disprove your assertion.

JPNelsforearm

View wrote: »

I was referring to actual refugees who make valid claims not to those who claim to be but aren't. We don't have any obligation to the latter once their claims have been fairly processed and (eventually) refused.

But in reality its next to impossible to deport them, see the massive backlog in the legal system currently, which then continues onto Europe leading to them hanging around. And even then, the Gardai cannot enter the "homes" of people who are here illegally, to deport them.
Or, its like the British/EU system, where people enter the country and "disappear".
Once you accept people, especially a large mass of people, on your territory, its next to impossible to get rid of them(unless you have the testicular fortitude of a Donald Trump to call it as it is).

jackofalltrades

View wrote: »

The onus lies with you to prove it is a global problem, not on others to disprove your assertion.

I'm not asking anybody to disprove my assertion, I'm asking them to backup theirs.

JPNelsforearm

View wrote: »

I am not saying it is easy for them (just as it wasn't for anyone else). Instead I am pointing out it is happening already and Africa in twenty five years time is likely to be quite different from today, never mind in fifty years time.

We, especially, in Ireland, shouldn't sneer. I once met someone who, as a child of someone who set up a MNC manufacturing plant in the midlands here in the 60s, saw locals all walking a long-ish distance to work in their first month, cycling to work a month later and driving to work a year later. Just as that one manufacturing plant had a big impact here way back then, you can be certain that their African equivalents will have an equally big (or larger) impact there.

Im not sneering, merely pointing out that Africans themselves point out that they are having massive problems industrialising due to India and China, For examples look at the linen/garment industry. The African "boom" is being driven by services and resources, they need to industrialise, but its not happening for them.

Lockstep

View wrote: »

I was referring to actual refugees who make valid claims not to those who claim to be but aren't. We don't have any obligation to the latter once their claims have been fairly processed and (eventually) refused.

Have you a source for your claim that only 20% are Syrian then? Presumably you're going by the Eurostat figures but these predate the crisis and are not very relevant.

Lockstep

jackofalltrades wrote: »

So are you planning to prove that extremism in the Muslim community isn't a global problem?

I don't need to: extremism is certainly a problem within elements of the Muslim community around the world. To say this is a global problem is fairly ridiculous. Unless you can prove otherwise?

jackofalltrades wrote: »

"But that's not really a problem for the United States."
So on some level it's a problem and remember this is just a journalists opinion.
Does it show that the US Muslim community doesn't have a problem with extremism. No it doesn't.

Yes it does: it highlights the vastly different socioeconomic positions that Muslims in the US enjoy compared to in Europe. As such, they're a lower risk.
Keep in mind I never once claimed that the "US Muslim community doesn't have a problem with extremism". Don't make stuff up please. I clearly stated

The source clearly shows that US Muslims are not much of a risk of extremism

RDM_83 again

Lockstep wrote: »

Well that depends on the country, doesn't it? Different Muslim populations have different levels of extremism.
The source clearly shows that US Muslims are not much of a risk of extremism: they're far wealthier and better integrated than their European counterparts. Especially when the majority of US terrorist attacks are by non-Muslims

So what your saying is that it might be a good idea not to import a very substantial group of Muslims who are already poor and poorly skilled .Syria had a fairly educated population for a middle eastern country, that actually doesnt mean that much,as the current cost estimates for Germany suggest (and this is mainstream media not right wing fringe), despite every refugee interviewed by the Guardian is a Engineer :-\

Nodin

RDM_83 again wrote: »

So what your saying is that it might be a good idea not to import a very substantial group of Muslims who are already poor and poorly skilled .Syria had a fairly educated population for a middle eastern country, that actually doesnt mean that much,as the current cost estimates for Germany suggest (and this is mainstream media not right wing fringe), despite every refugee interviewed by the Guardian is a Engineer :-\

This seems to be mistaking granting refuge with immigration. These people are being taken in due to a war, not 'imported' due to some labour shortage.

View

jackofalltrades wrote: »

I'm not asking anybody to disprove my assertion, I'm asking them to backup theirs.

You are the one making the assertion there is a "global problem", it is up to you you to back that up.

Either you can prove it or you can't...

View

Lockstep wrote: »

Have you a source for your claim that only 20% are Syrian then? Presumably you're going by the Eurostat figures but these predate the crisis and are not very relevant.

You are confusing me with another poster, I think.

View

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Im not sneering, merely pointing out that Africans themselves point out that they are having massive problems industrialising due to India and China, For examples look at the linen/garment industry. The African "boom" is being driven by services and resources, they need to industrialise, but its not happening for them.

Africa currently is experiencing a mini-investment boom due largely to Chinese investment as the Chinese off-shore some of their manufacturing to cheaper Africa countries, so industrialisation is happening.

Second, I amn't convinced that a country must "industrialise" in the classical "industrial revolution" sense as many jobs in the modern high-tech and banking industries would count as "service" jobs if I remember rightly.

View

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

But in reality its next to impossible to deport them, see the massive backlog in the legal system currently, which then continues onto Europe leading to them hanging around. And even then, the Gardai cannot enter the "homes" of people who are here illegally, to deport them.
Or, its like the British/EU system, where people enter the country and "disappear".
Once you accept people, especially a large mass of people, on your territory, its next to impossible to get rid of them(unless you have the testicular fortitude of a Donald Trump to call it as it is).

No, it isn't impossible to deport them. Both it and voluntary repatriations happen all the time.

There is unquestionably a need to increase the rate of (non-voluntary) deportations for failed applicants and the member states have already agreed to do so.