Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Europe’s future

This film clip shows what future Europe will face before long with this enormous influx of people from the Middle East and Africa, and with politicians that just talk and lack the ability to take action.

This applies in particular to Swedish politicians. The Swedish Prime Minister, Stefan Löfven, repeats like a parrot his worn mantra: “The other EU countries must take their responsibility”.

Yes, the other EU countries actually do take their responsibility, but for their own citizens, i.e. for those who pay the politicians salaries. In Sweden, such an argument are labelled Fascist.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Time for yet another video clip. This time it is the Former Swedish Minister of Finance, Mr Anders Borg, that makes a statement at the Peterson Institute meeting in 2013.

He acknowledges what people in Sweden have suspected for a long time: the US make war in the Middle East, and Sweden gets (most of) the refugees.

As a Swedish citizen, we were never, and are never, told that the influx is so enormous. We always hear that an influx is good, but we are never told officially that we outdo all the other European countries to this extent.

The big influx is something that the politicians conceal, and so do the media, who work alongside the politicians against the people. People who try to debate this fact are immediately called “racists” by the politicians, the media and their henchmen (Antifa and the like). This is an easy way of muzzling a whole nation.

So listen to the truth, that was easily conveyed to foreigners, but was never unmasked onshore:

 

Read Full Post »

I do not often post anything on this blog anylonger. Sometimes there are things that have to be reblogged or published, though. This clip is such a product. It summarizes what is going on in Sweden and the atmosphere under which Swedes are living. Take a deep breath – you won’t be the same person after having seen this film!

Read Full Post »

Author: S R Larson (presentation)

Before Sverigedemokraterna (the Swedish Democrats) won seats in the Swedish national parliament in September last year there was not a critical word uttered in the Riksdag about Sweden’s immigration policy. Today the situation is different: SD politicians take every opportunity to challenge the reckless open-borders policies imposed by the political elite. The first reaction from that elite was to expand an already excessively generous immigration policy to invite even more immigrants from far-away corners of the world. Though this might have been expected (I personally did not think they would have the audacity) it is nevertheless refreshing to see that the SD challenge is not going unnoticed by the elite.

The fact of the matter is that the SD challenge has come at the very last moment: the open borders policy has overwhelmed Sweden with immigration of a size and character that begs the question if the prime minister actually knows what he is doing. The official motive for allowing massive immigration is that Sweden is in desperate need of workforce immigration. Presumably, the retirement of the baby boomers born in the 1940s leaves so many open spots on the labor market that native Swedes cannot possibly fill them. Therefore, the story goes, Sweden needs to invite as many marginally educated Somalis and Afghans as possible.

The flaws in this argument are so many that it is surprising it is still being used. To begin with, the 1940s generation has been retiring for about eight years already. The average retirement age in Sweden has been hovering around 62-63 for a long time, which means that of almost one million 40s boomers, some 700,000 have already retired. Any student of the Swedish economy knows that this has not caused any massive shortage of labor at all. On the contrary, over the past ten years the employment rate of the Swedish work force has actually dropped from 67 percent to 64 percent. A larger share of the work force is without a job today than during the Millennium recession, despite the baby boomer generation’s retirement.

It is easy to see why this drop in employment has taken place. In an economy that creates 60,000 new jobs per year in good economic times, the employment rate cannot rise if there is also a large net immigration taking place. Over the past ten years immigration has increased from 60,000 per year to 100,000. During the same time, according to Statistics Sweden migration data, emigration has risen from 33,000 to 48,000 resulting in a significant growth in net migration: ten years ago immigration exceeded emigration by 27,000 people. Today net immigration exceeds 52,000 per year, with a record high of 63,000 in 2009.

These numbers should be considered in view of Sweden’s population of only nine million. To make matters worse, there is a persistent education gap between people leaving and coming to Sweden. Very few immigrants have a high school degree, while the average emigrant has at least a BA university degree.

It is obvious that the arithmetic of Sweden’s immigration policy is working against the best interests of the Swedish people and the Swedish economy. Exporting educated workers and importing uneducated people is bad enough; importing two uneducated workers for everyone who leaves is directly irresponsible. Who is going to pay for the education of these immigrants? If Sweden really had an insatiable need for workforce immigration, then how come the 30 countries within the EU and the Nordic region cannot satisfy that need? Why would Sweden have to rely on the remotest – geographically, culturally and socially – corners of the world to fill its workforce need, provided such a need existed? (Which, again, it does not.)

A couple of factoids from Eurostat, the statistics agency of the EU, further underscore how out-of-control irresponsible this immigration policy actually is. Sweden is Europe’s second-largest recipient of immigrants – in absolute numbers – from the least-developed nations in the world. Only Britain takes in more least-developed immigrants, and its rationale lies in its commonwealth past. Furthermore, in 2007 this small nation, with less than three percent of the EU population, took in 16 percent of all asylum seekers absorbed by the EU. No other EU country accepted a larger share than Sweden.

The asylum-driven inflow is steadfastly growing. Apparently, Sweden has made a name for itself as having open borders: from 2007 to 2010 the number of asylum seekers coming to Sweden increased by 50 percent, with a 32-percent increase from 2009 to 2010 alone.

There is no way to motivate Sweden’s immigration madness, no matter how you slice immigration and labor market statistics. The country has opened its borders, lowered the bar for immigrants with questionable documentation and made its welfare state available even to those who are denied immigration or asylum. The challenge from the Swedish Democrats came in the nick of time. The question is: will it make a difference in the nick of time?

Follow my blog with bloglovin

pi, pi, pi, biv, biv, tg, tg, vg, vl, vl, vl, po, po, ft, ft, ft, nr, nr, nr, dt.

st, st, av, pcf, bt, bt, db, db, db, gd, gd, ek, ek, ek, ne, ne, ne, mn, mn, mn, mn, al, al, bk, bk, ln, ln, dm, svt, svt, nm, nm, svt, svt, ft, ft, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, sr, kj, kk, cc, ha, ai, kt, dn, dn ,dn, dn, svd, svd, svd, svd, ex, gp, gp, gp, gp, gp, smp, smp, smp, sd, sd, sd.

Read Full Post »

Sweden is the country in Europe that opens its doors to the highest number of immigrants. The Migration Board’s director-general, Dan Eliasson, sees no reason to worry.

In 2009, permanent residence permits (PUT) were granted to over 102,000 immigrants, the number UN convention refugees of which was less than 5 per cent. The largest immigrant group consists of people seeking family reunification with immigrants that have already been granted PUT.

Those who don’t meet the requirement of the UN standards, can be allowed a permanent residence anyway, with reference to “particularly compassionate grounds” (979 persons in 2009) or with reference to having a “need of protection” (5967 persons in 2009). As far as I am informed, no other European country have these other reasons for residence permit. NB! Most of the immigrants (95%) arriving to Sweden have no identity documents. They are more often than not allowed to stay anyway, even though this is against the law.

Now let’s look further into the reasons that convinced the Migration Court that the following persons must stay. I will here enumerate a number of reasons that led to a permanent residence permit (PUT):

Case UM 3139-80 Yemenite woman had had sex with a Canadian, now she runs the risk of being murdered by her uncle

Case UM 993-09 Divorce after bogus marriage (in order to get a PUT) no reason for cancelling the PUT

Case UM 3411-08 The parents’ reasons for PUT are not credible but the oldest child has turned apathetic so PUT is granted

Case UM 1673-09 Girl born 1992 gets PUT because of mental illness

Case UM 595-09 Man from Kamerun says he is son of a deceased headman; he doesn’t want to inherit the headmanship, the father’s 6 wives and 28 children

Case UM 2479-09 Raped Iranian woman had been harassed by her divorced husband after the rape

Case UM 1662-09 Young Iraqi man gets PUT in spite of no actual reason but for the fact that he otherwise must live in a state of uncertainty as regards the point of time of the expulsion from Sweden

Case UM 2902-08 Afghan man gets PUT because of a psychotic illness

Case UM 5814-08 A Sudanese woman risks being frozen out from society because she has a child

Case UM 2053-09 A family that states they come from Yemen and that Al-Qaeda are after them

These are only ten cases out of many hundred thousands more. A list of some more PUT permissions is to be found here.

In a British TV documentary, immigrants (the majority being young men) were interviewed on the reasons for trying to get into Great Britain. It appeared that they were trying to “live the European dream”, i.e. to get themselves better economic conditions than they had in Africa and in the Middle East. Consequently, the speaker called them “economical migrants”.

Having given examples of a few of all the reasons of the immigrants to Sweden granted permanent residence permit on the grounds of a “need of protection”, the immediate question at issue is if they are not as well to be called “economical migrants”.

Sweden’s welfare system is the most generous in Europe. The Swedish tax burden is the heaviest in Europe. There is a connection between these two facts. The one requires the other. An immigrant who has got a permanent residence permit automatically has the right to receive all the social welfare allowances there are. Couldn’t this, put together with the proportionate easiness to obtain the PUT, be a contributory reason for the fact that Sweden functions like magnet for immigrants?

Follow my blog with bloglovin

Read Full Post »