Are you for or against immigration?
- Thread starter Bepo
- Start date
A country cannot really live without any immigration
Economicaly attracting brain from outside is good, or more pragmatically for jobs not really qualified
Plus family wise people sometimes marry with someone from somewhere else it’s normal to welcome them or their kids.
And to renew your population immigration can be good.
Immigration can also be good to open your mind to other cultures.
overall and for a lot of reasons immigration is needed.
But yeah it must also be controlled and checked. No country can welcome everyone in any conditions.
The most important thing is how you welcome new people and how you manage to make them feel at home in your country and how they manage to mix/melt in the new country.
So just saying yes or no is too simple
Economicaly attracting brain from outside is good, or more pragmatically for jobs not really qualified
Plus family wise people sometimes marry with someone from somewhere else it’s normal to welcome them or their kids.
And to renew your population immigration can be good.
Immigration can also be good to open your mind to other cultures.
overall and for a lot of reasons immigration is needed.
But yeah it must also be controlled and checked. No country can welcome everyone in any conditions.
The most important thing is how you welcome new people and how you manage to make them feel at home in your country and how they manage to mix/melt in the new country.
So just saying yes or no is too simple
You should remove public votes on this poll since some people can probably "fear" to be oppressed saying they are against.
----------------
I personally think that immigration must exist ( and is certainly inevitable to some extent ) on the one hand to counterbalance the decreasing demographics of the countries having completed their demographic transition the earliest in order to provide manpower and on the other hand to still reduce a little bit the flow of stateless people. However, I think that this process should be reduced to try to preserve the culture of nations as much as possible and very rigorously controlled for the people received.
--------------
I don't know which one I'm supposed to vote
----------------
I personally think that immigration must exist ( and is certainly inevitable to some extent ) on the one hand to counterbalance the decreasing demographics of the countries having completed their demographic transition the earliest in order to provide manpower and on the other hand to still reduce a little bit the flow of stateless people. However, I think that this process should be reduced to try to preserve the culture of nations as much as possible and very rigorously controlled for the people received.
--------------
I don't know which one I'm supposed to vote
Last edited:
Depends on the population and is against illegal immigration. All for legal and controlled immigration.
When a country population grows too fast, the demands overtakes the supply. The result is an increase in prices aka inflation to make the supply harder to acquire. Not to mention the competition in getting a stable source of income. It's one of the reasons a 4 year college don't mean shit nowadays.
So for the overpopulated and unstable US, I think immigration should temporarily cease in order to better stabilize the country and when some control is acquired, let the immigration flow.
When a country population grows too fast, the demands overtakes the supply. The result is an increase in prices aka inflation to make the supply harder to acquire. Not to mention the competition in getting a stable source of income. It's one of the reasons a 4 year college don't mean shit nowadays.
So for the overpopulated and unstable US, I think immigration should temporarily cease in order to better stabilize the country and when some control is acquired, let the immigration flow.
Yeah but the problem is that not all people want to live in a multicultural society inwich immigration has occured. It's like geusts arriving in your own house without consenting to their presence.
Immigrants by existing automatically demine the cultural hegemony of the nation they immigrate to. Because of that they automatically work against the nation (who’s majority is said cultural hegemony)’s interest.
Immigrants by existing automatically demine the cultural hegemony of the nation they immigrate to. Because of that they automatically work against the nation (who’s majority is said cultural hegemony)’s interest.
i dont get what does race has to do with culture and cultural hegemony of a nation.
secondly majority of the legal immigrants tend to adopt and assimilate into the host countries' culture. also even if they practice some ceremonies from their home culture, they tend to do it in private so i dont understand why the cultural hegemony of a nation is at stake tbh.
im genuinely curious and would love to hear more about your pov on this touchy topic.
secondly majority of the legal immigrants tend to adopt and assimilate into the host countries' culture. also even if they practice some ceremonies from their home culture, they tend to do it in private so i dont understand why the cultural hegemony of a nation is at stake tbh.
im genuinely curious and would love to hear more about your pov on this touchy topic.
this definitely isn't a diplomatic and mutual immigration.. where i live the nationals are out numbered by 1/10th..yet the culture is highly diverse.. and its certainly due to international legal relations.
ig its highly contingent to the country's condition..
@Bepo honestly like the country is burdened economically to a certain degree you can see that with Turkey too they have over a million Syrian refugees and it increases demands altogether .. even illegal immagrants when tolerated should do "as the romans do" if you get what i mean..the culture is at minimal loss here since its a matter of conduciveness and adaptability.
thats SouthAsia for you.
ig its highly contingent to the country's condition..
Post automatically merged:
@Bepo honestly like the country is burdened economically to a certain degree you can see that with Turkey too they have over a million Syrian refugees and it increases demands altogether .. even illegal immagrants when tolerated should do "as the romans do" if you get what i mean..the culture is at minimal loss here since its a matter of conduciveness and adaptability.
Post automatically merged:
Not going to paeticipate in this thread as this is getting too political at this point.
But
ROFL
But
ROFL
Last edited: