IMMIGRATION thread

[Viking]

Would you care to give us your definition then or are you just against the current one?

I don't have an exact definition I'd like to see be the dominant one, but the current use strikes me as having a tendency of stretching it too far. If a refugee can remain a refugee as long as they don't have legal asylum anywhere and their home country is dangerous, then the term can become rather silly and redundant in many contexts.

Another possible way to look at it is to observe a distinction between a technical/legal version of the term and an informal version, where the the informal version should be reserved for more acute and obvious cases.

Germany, and some other EU countries are, in fact, looking on the refugees as economic saviours.

http://www.bloombergview.com/article...comes-refugees

An aging population needs to be supported.

Population growth is not sustainable in the long run; at some point it has to stop (literally, otherwise the Earth would eventually collapse into a degenerate stellar body, and ultimately into a black hole).

It's not unnatural that population growth is followed by population decline, so they might just be pushing an inevitable future further ahead.