U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-09-2018, 10:58 PM
 
4,725 posts, read 2,123,191 times
Reputation: 4320

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by philopower View Post
It seems that the US tends to get criticized the most by the global media and governments for their immigration policy,, despite taking in a million people each year. I donít understand why though? Why does the world feel like itís americís obligation to take in all of the worldís population. Why do people feel like they deserve to live here?
I don't think so. The USA is globally criticized due to inhumane, isolationist, destructive and random acts.

Read up on how may refugees were accepted by the EU before whimpering about migration to the USA. The USA is barely a blip in the scale of global migration, no reason to play the victim here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-09-2018, 11:37 PM
 
Location: Brisbane
3,350 posts, read 5,127,801 times
Reputation: 2664
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpdivola View Post
Given their geography, Canada and Australia have a greater ability to select their immigrants. Not surprisingly, they use that ability to cherry pick a diverse mix of mostly high skilled immigrants with English (or French) language skills. This of course makes immigration far less divisive in those societies than in the US with its large unauthorized flows of low skilled immigrants with limited English proficiency.

But, it is unclear if Europe is better off than the US. In many ways they have a tougher geography than the US with large refugee flows from Africa and the Middle East (in addition to eastern European immigrants). Beyond issues of skill gaps/poverty, there are greater cultural gaps between Europe and ME than US and LA.
There are still almost 1 million Australians who speak little or no English, about 3.5% of the population. Mostly due to those cherry picked immigrants brining spouses and parents etc with them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 12:38 AM
 
895 posts, read 813,627 times
Reputation: 1051
Quote:
Originally Posted by the troubadour View Post
Indeed. Australia certainly 'cherry picks', no turning up at borders and pleading asylum as was the case in Germany and other EU countries. Australia often refers to having the second high intake of refugees after Canada in population terms, and third after USA and Canada in overall terms, but that is only official intake figures.


Germany, Sweden Netherlands and so on take far more, but most do not come under the official UNHCR selection process.

I'm not familiar enough with the various policies toward refugee admission in Europe. But, in practice there is often little difference between the fiscal impacts/social integration challenges of "low skilled economic migrants" and refugees. When this is accounted for, Australia and Canada are probably a little less "generous" on a comparative basis than a simple refugee count would show.


Quote:
Originally Posted by the troubadour View Post
Is USA so much better off with less cultural gaps than Europe? Debatable I suppose. London has a huge African diaspora these days from countries as varied as Congo to Nigeria (very high numbers) and so on.


Belgium is home, naturally enough to many Congolese. France to many West Coast Africans and has the biggest Muslim and Jewish population in Europe.( UK second)

Generalizing massively, but I think on net the US has an easier time integrating Catholic Latino immigrants into a still fairly devout mostly-Christian country than the EU has with integrating conservative Muslim immigrants into secular post-Christian nations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 12:54 AM
 
895 posts, read 813,627 times
Reputation: 1051
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielsa1775 View Post
There are still almost 1 million Australians who speak little or no English, about 3.5% of the population. Mostly due to those cherry picked immigrants brining spouses and parents etc with them.

In the US the comparable figure is 25 million or 8.5% of the population. This is all the more surprising when you consider Australia has a larger immigrant population (in %) than the US.



https://profile.id.com.au/australia/speaks-english
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/arti...-united-states
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 01:06 AM
 
1,984 posts, read 682,605 times
Reputation: 1231
Quote:
Originally Posted by the troubadour View Post
Ah, you mean The 'Coalition of the Willing', from memory what it was called. Unwilling more likely, but unwilling to resist was where the wiliness came into play. America had to make it look like the world, as aspects of it was on side. The fabricated nuclear weapons story, of course easing the plight of certain other nations to convince, at least portions of their populations, that there was little choice.
A fight 'good' against 'evil' indeed.


As refugees, lets see now. Perhaps it has more to do with the western 'stuff up's' as a result of interventions in that area and the more internationally focused, often rather well educated, cosmopolitan nature too often displayed by Syrians and Iraq's that make them more likely candidates to cross borders in the first place?


Of course Congolese are suffering, enormously and in many cases horribly. But by and large they remain within own and neighbouring countries and do not in general come to mind for out of continent resettlement, besides in more limited numbers.


Suffering is of course suffering and in an ideal world, equal consideration would be given to individual need and not nationalities, but such considerations as to compatibility to settlement in very alien environments is not always to the advantage of the seeker of refuge also.
I think you're mixing up the Iraq War with the Syrian one. I know they are neighboring countries, but those are two very different theaters. The Iraq War was largely unpopular from the get go, with only the UK and Australia joining in, but in Syria there are far more players involved.

On the other hand, if we take into account statistics about recent refugee migration patterns, we find out that a significant number of them are economic migrants looking to take advantage of the situation. Many of them are not even from Syria.

I'm glad you at least recognize the dilemma that morality imposes. I only brought up the Congo because of the scale, but there are a lot of other conflicts to consider. In recent years, Venezuelans have fled to Colombia and Brazil. I don't oppose refugees at all. I do believe in helping them, but out of compassion and not because of some arbitrary moral obligation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 01:58 AM
 
Location: Brisbane
3,350 posts, read 5,127,801 times
Reputation: 2664
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpdivola View Post
In the US the comparable figure is 25 million or 8.5% of the population. This is all the more surprising when you consider Australia has a larger immigrant population (in %) than the US.



https://profile.id.com.au/australia/speaks-english
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/arti...-united-states
The fact that Australia does not have a dominate second language would contribute to that to some degree i would imagine. I've never been to the US, but I would imagine it would be entirely possible for even a US born person to live their entire life using nothing but Spanish?

I actually though the US number would be higher.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 03:04 AM
 
2,091 posts, read 2,901,809 times
Reputation: 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpdivola View Post
In the US the comparable figure is 25 million or 8.5% of the population. This is all the more surprising when you consider Australia has a larger immigrant population (in %) than the US.



https://profile.id.com.au/australia/speaks-english
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/arti...-united-states
Well not really. Far from the largest birthplace of Australian migrants remains by far UK. The second is New Zealand. the forth is India, (where one may expect the big majority already speak English to varying degrees of high levels) Then countries like Malaysia and Philippines, both high levels of English.


China, number 3 country is likely a mixed bag, but many I've come across have high levels as well.


Now the 'old immigrant' from Southern Europe is fast in decline. Mortality is taking a heavy toll, as populations of Greeks, Italians and what have you decline.


The USA, of course is a very different matter. Your neighbourhood is made up entirely differently, besides entire localities of some states Spanish is ample to get by and survive on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 03:15 AM
 
2,091 posts, read 2,901,809 times
Reputation: 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielsa1775 View Post
The fact that Australia does not have a dominate second language would contribute to that to some degree i would imagine. I've never been to the US, but I would imagine it would be entirely possible for even a US born person to live their entire life using nothing but Spanish?

I actually though the US number would be higher.

You just included my argument. entirely so. There would be an argument, certainly in certain States, to make Spanish, an official second language.


Chinese, Mandarin is it appears Australia's second language now, with Italian dipping, and Indian languages such as Hindi, Punjabi, Tamil, Bengali shown the biggest growth.


An Asian language, probably Chinese may well become an official language, in Australia, at some stage, a way down the track.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 03:28 AM
 
2,091 posts, read 2,901,809 times
Reputation: 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milky Way Resident View Post
I think you're mixing up the Iraq War with the Syrian one. I know they are neighboring countries, but those are two very different theaters. The Iraq War was largely unpopular from the get go, with only the UK and Australia joining in, but in Syria there are far more players involved.

On the other hand, if we take into account statistics about recent refugee migration patterns, we find out that a significant number of them are economic migrants looking to take advantage of the situation. Many of them are not even from Syria.

I'm glad you at least recognize the dilemma that morality imposes. I only brought up the Congo because of the scale, but there are a lot of other conflicts to consider. In recent years, Venezuelans have fled to Colombia and Brazil. I don't oppose refugees at all. I do believe in helping them, but out of compassion and not because of some arbitrary moral obligation.

What I am doing of course, is pointing out the destabilisation of the area, by foreign intrusion, regardless of country, is what contributed to the situation that developed.


AS for refugees, well the majority were Syrian, but of course quite large numbers of Afghani's, another country, badly let down by outside intervention creating chaos.


is it such a dilemma? Well yes it is in ways. The West has their priority, sadly Congolese don't fit the profile. I believe UNHCR has voiced this as a area of grave concern, but little interest to offer placements or indeed, if that is even the best way to deal with the situation there. But I have stated this,
The destruction of Syria, and movement of people towards Europe forced the world to take some action.


Spare a thought for nations like Turkey, that have two million Syrians, or Jordon or Lebanon. Hardly the infrastructure to cope with such numbers.


But then it has always been the poorer, developing world that hosts the most.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2018, 08:18 AM
 
895 posts, read 813,627 times
Reputation: 1051
Quote:
Originally Posted by philopower View Post
It seems that the US tends to get criticized the most by the global media and governments for their immigration policy,, despite taking in a million people each year. I don’t understand why though? Why does the world feel like it’s americ’s obligation to take in all of the world’s population. Why do people feel like they deserve to live here?
I'm not sure this is really a widely held position. I think the real argument is:

Why do immigration activists in the US believe that the US should take in all of the poor people?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top