It will never be 0. There will always be someone sneaking in via a truck or train or in the cargo department of a ship or even with a false visa in a plane. So how much per month is still ok?
In Europe, 99 percent of illegal migrants end up applying for asylum simple because the EU asylum system is broken and you get housing and welfare if you ask for asylum even if you are rejected (and in most cases you aren’t deported).
In 2016, monthly claims in Europe peaked at 140,000 in September (claims were processed delayed due to the migrant crisis in 2015, most claims in 2016 were for migrants coming in 2015).
Since then, claims have fallen down to 40,000 per month - most coming in via the Turkey-Greece-Balkan route. I say if that figure could be brought down to below 10,000 a month, we would be ok. But 40,000 per month? That is still massive - and it is a lie by the EU that illegal crossings have gone down 95 percent, they have not.
Depends on the nation. Lowland Germany, Tuscany and upper class Americans? Probably 100%, just give them all to us. Kalahari desert bushmen and Khoisan? Probably wonderful people, but I'll take 0% thank you.
The numbers are meaningless, quantity isn't the question, it's all about quality.
Hudson Martin
no limit on marriages. but divorce would be illegal and there would be no other method of entry.
Jonathan Cox
Given there are too many fucking illegals as is, I say acceptable level is negative 100k
Joseph Taylor
a long long time ago we held people to those standards. I guess that's why we left the stone age to become developed in a single century, a task that took other nations much longer.
Shouldn't you be asking what the acceptable level of IMMIGRATION is?.... and account for illegal immigration based on that?
David Wright
I dunno, several thousand a year? For the United States.
Aiden Flores
>illegal >Acceptable You're not making any sense Hans
Jayden Rodriguez
>It will never be 0. Then I'll settle for the next best thing, 1
Juan Bell
I am not talking about net illegal migration, but gross. Obviously it would be nice if only 100k were comin in, but 200k deported in a year.
John Reed
>Shouldn't you be asking what the acceptable level of IMMIGRATION is?.... and account for illegal immigration based on that?
No. Legal immigration to Europe (except the UK) from outside Europe is pretty much non-existent. There are a few Jap students and Americans and Colombian housewifes coming to Germany or Denmark. But generally legal migration to Western continental Europe is net negative from the world... and way net negative in the East.
Pretty much all problems stem from illegal migration here. The UK is the sole exception, the UK imports 150k net from the non-white Commonwealth per year (Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Caribbean etc.)
Aiden Morgan
No, it's asking about how much you allocate to the issue in resources. >how many school shootings are acceptable? Obviously none, but to totally prevent them we would have to repeal the 2nd amendment and 4th amendment and then implement a massive confiscation program that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and violate the rights of hundreds of milloons of Americans. So we permit a few random mass shootings.
We could have a strictly closed border - no one in unless you are already a citizen. But that would hurt trade, tourism, international relations, etc. We will ALWAYS have visa overstayers or people sneaking in somehow. What is a reasonable, acceptable limit that would could realistically cap the problem at without implementing a solution worse than the problem?
Lucas Sullivan
So if it is not 1, what level do you think is still survivable?
Leo Reed
>So how much per month is still ok? >It will never be 0 It shouldn't be 0. It should be negative. >How to achieve negative net migration in Europe? Easy. >Abolish Dublin 3. Every illegal Muzzie and Nog gets cataloged and marked physically in the country he is currently in. That country is responsible for him henceforth. >No right of free movement, mandatory (semi-)closed facilities during status and identity checks >Welfare gets only who shows up every morning at 7:30 and does community work until 16:30 >Asylum seekers have no chance of obtaining a passport or a permanent stay right ever. Status of country of origin gets checked every year. >Definition of an "unsafe state" is much more narrow than before. >Also, 3 decisive actions concerning Islam >1. Ban halal food (because animal protection) >2. Ban headscarfs (because safety) >3. Ban Q'uran and Islam (because, yeah, fuck it, it was about that all along)
What we need are new rules. Tough rules that are fair towards those who want to assimilate and impossible to follow for those who are after our land, woman and money.
Justin Nguyen
0 Illegal immigration is the acceptable level.
Easton Butler
100 a month would be too much. Illegals should be forceably removed. People helping Illegals should be punished. People marrying illegals should lose their citizenship and should be thrown out as well.
Anthony Butler
There is a way to get illegal migration to almost nothing. Kill 1 in 10 that cross the boarder, publically. Then release the other 9 out of the country to spread the word. 3-4 weeks after killing 1 in 10 illegal migrants the number that try to cross will fall to almost nothing. It's immoral, but it works.
Jeremiah Walker
Just like with traffic deaths, zero is probably not possible, but we should definitely do everything practically & economically manageable to bring it as low as possible.
Alexander Ward
That's why i love switzerland.
Robert Butler
>It's immoral to kill a few of them Is it though? In 2015, a few buddies and I agreed that it would be best to torpedo a few of those migrant ships. Not when empty but when filled with niggers. Because muh blood thirst? No. Because ironically, it would safe lives.
