Monday, October 18, 2010

Angie becomes Geertje

So, this weekend, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that

"Multi-culturalism is dead.... long live multi-culturalism"

no the last bit of the sentence I put in.
She actually said, how guest workers (Gastarbeiters) that came to lift up the economy during the 60s (and till now!) have not left as the Germans had once believed, but now the Germans and the immigrants could not "live happily side by side".

The reasons noted not only by her, but others is that
1. too many come
2. they all bring their (large) families)
3. they eat up all the welfare checks

The thing I would like to know is
1. how many did actually came in the last decades
2. Does the German government believe in splitting up families? So you only want to bring in the young workers, without their dependents?
3. Did you not think of this when you wanted to import (skilled) workers?
4. What exactly is the proportion of migrants on welfare schemes - I ask this, since I know they will not make it easy to get ANY migrants on it
5. How much of the recent/past economic growth can you attribute to the migrant community??
6. WHO do you exactly define as migrants anyhow? Are you saying those who were born in Germany but of different ethnicity are also migrants? - since these days "migrant" is just a way for them to say "middle eastern/muslim"....

about question number 5, and 4
Migrant workers are a great asset, fuel of economic growth when the economy is doing well and there is a worker/ skill shortage. This is when the media and the politicians shut the **ck up about migration issues. On the other hand, in economic conditions such as now, in recession, companies let go of the vulnerable workers first - thus the women and migrants. Also, in times of uncertainty, employers will not employ new workers, but when they do, they go back into the traditional way of thinking - employing white men.
Thus, when we say migrants are on welfare checks, let;s really see who it is to blame. I know that there are asylum seekers that can be categorized as abit different case, but really what is this percentage, and again whose fault is it- their fault or the failure of the integration/training policies? Also, if you fail to accept those in dire situation, what type of world wide brotherhood are we supporting?

but overall, why isn't anyone showing hard proof concerning this at all?
and another thing, who can really define who "immigrants" are? Who are we kidding pretending nations have existed for a long time? its only in the past one of two decades that countries formed their current boundaries. and Even before then, there were loads of mass migrations all over. Do nations really have the legitimacy to say who the country belongs to?
I believe that migration is the easy way out for many politicians when they want to make a grand reform on the current social security/assistance scheme, so it doesn't upset their main voting population. Unfortunately, this whole scheme is working...

No comments: