EU Immigration Crisis Megathread

[Zanza]

The irony of all this is that, if the EU (or at least the Eurozone) were a properly functioning federal country much like the US, the migrants would just stay in Greece or Italy, much like the Mexicans staying in the border states of the US.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/14/15-states-with-the-highest-share-of-immigrants-in-their-population/

California, New York, New Jersey, Florida ...

That seems to be all over the place...

[Valmy]

Those are not just Mexicans

[Eddie Teach]

But the Mexicans don't all stick to the border states either. Illinois, North Carolina, New York, Georgia, Florida, Washington, Colorado and Nevada all have over 200,000(which is more than New Mexico).

http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/us-immigrant-population-state-and-county?width=1000&height=850&iframe=true

[Zanza]

Those are not just Mexicans

The migrants that come to Greece or Italy are typically not from directly neighbouring countries so the comparison to Mexicans does not fit. Do other Latin American immigrants concentrate in the Southern states of the US?

[Valmy]

Those are not just Mexicans

The migrants that come to Greece or Italy are typically not from directly neighbouring countries so the comparison to Mexicans does not fit.

No it is a nonsense analogy for dozens of reasons.

Do other Latin American immigrants concentrate in the Southern states of the US?

Well Lusti does live in Alabama so...but he does not count since he is not an immigrant.

But no. Latin Americans have gathered in four states: Texas, California, New York, and Florida. Their points of entry I presume.

[Valmy]

But the Mexicans don't all stick to the border states either. Illinois, North Carolina, New York, Georgia, Florida, Washington, Colorado and Nevada all have over 200,000(which is more than New Mexico).

http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/us-immigrant-population-state-and-county?width=1000&height=850&iframe=true

I love how there are 100,000 Polish Immigrants in Chicago. They just cannot get enough of immigrating to Chicago.

[Syt]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34561531

German mayoral candidate Reker stabbed over refugee support

A leading candidate in Cologne's mayoral race has been stabbed in the neck by a man claiming to be angry over the country's refugee policies.

Henriette Reker - an independent candidate supported by Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU party - was seriously injured along with an aide. Three others suffered minor injuries.

Local police said Ms Reker, 58, was "stable, but not out of the woods".

Police have arrested a 44-year-old German national and Cologne resident.

The attacker told police he stabbed Ms Reker "because of anti-foreigner motives," senior police investigator Norbert Wagner said.

The suspect appeared to have acted alone and had no police record, Mr Wagner added.

Ralf Jager, a regional interior minister, said: "The first signs speak for a politically motivated act."

The attacker will undergo a psychiatric examination to establish whether that was his primary motive or whether he had a health problem.

A spokesman for Ms Merkel said the chancellor "expressed her shock and condemned this act".

Germany's interior minister, Thomas de Maiziere, called the attack "appalling and cowardly".

City officials said the election would go ahead as planned. Ms Reker has been the head of Cologne's social affairs and integration department since 2010.

Ms Merkel has come under fire from some in Germany over the large numbers of refugees and migrants being allowed into the country.

Germany has said it expects 800,000 people to seek asylum this year, but a leaked report suggested the number could be as high as 1.5 million.

Politically-motivated attacks are relatively rare in Germany. In 1990, then-Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble was shot while out campaigning, an attack that left him using a wheelchair.

A few months earlier, Oskar Lafontaine, then a prominent member of Germany's main opposition party, was stabbed in the neck by a mentally disturbed woman.

[Martinus]

To me, "refugee" would describe someone displaced by some sort of crisis (be it political, environmental, or what-have-you) for an indefinite but temporary period, whereas "immigrant" (and its opposite, "emigrant") would describe someone moving to a different country on what is intended to be a permanent basis.  "Migrant" would describe someone who is moving around on a constant or near constant basis, as in a migrant farm worker who moves around the country on a seasonal basis.

Perhaps instead of trying to understand what the term means "to you", you should read what it means in law, such as, I don't know, the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees?

For example the temporary element is not an inherent part of the refugee definition.

[Martinus]

I had meant the people fleeing Syria, specifically; sorry for not being clearer.  I think we would describe the people from the Balkans as "Immigrants" which has a more neutral connotation for us (positively "America is a land of immigrants," negatively "Illegal immigrant.")  "Migrant," I think, is a little more negative ("Migrant worker.")

To me immigrant connotes someone who moves to another country in accordance with the law.

That would make all bona fide refugees immigrants, which I don't believe is the case when this expression is used.

This is because, under the aforementioned convention, an entry of a bona fide refugee (i.e. someone who fulfils the criteria for being a refugee) into a country which is a party to the convention is automatically legalised, provided he or she presents himself or herself to the authorities, irrespective of whether it may have been done not in accordance with local immigration rules. I think people ignore this part when talking about "illegal immigrants".

[Martinus]

I dunno, what about the widespread use of the term "illegal immigrant"?

The adjective "illegal" changes the meaning.

That doesn't make sense. It's like using the expression "man without a penis" to denote a woman. At least logically speaking, if you add an adjective to a noun, it usually connotes a sub-set of the group represented by the noun, not something opposite to the adjective-less noun.

[Martinus]

The irony of all this is that, if the EU (or at least the Eurozone) were a properly functioning federal country much like the US, the migrants would just stay in Greece or Italy, much like the Mexicans staying in the border states of the US.

Not sure if serious.

[Martinus]

But the Mexicans don't all stick to the border states either. Illinois, North Carolina, New York, Georgia, Florida, Washington, Colorado and Nevada all have over 200,000(which is more than New Mexico).

http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/us-immigrant-population-state-and-county?width=1000&height=850&iframe=true

I love how there are 100,000 Polish Immigrants in Chicago. They just cannot get enough of immigrating to Chicago.

Well, right now, in Warsaw it is raining, cloudy and the temperature is just above freezing. I suppose Chicago has similar weather.

[The Brain]

Polish style pizza sucks.

[Admiral Yi]

That doesn't make sense. It's like using the expression "man without a penis" to denote a woman. At least logically speaking, if you add an adjective to a noun, it usually connotes a sub-set of the group represented by the noun, not something opposite to the adjective-less noun.

Do you understand what connote means?

Yes, one can immigrate legally and illegally.  My contention is when used with out the modifier it is generally understood to refer to the legal kind.  Just as it is generally understood to refer to a human instead of an Martian or a bacteria.

[Martinus]

That doesn't make sense. It's like using the expression "man without a penis" to denote a woman. At least logically speaking, if you add an adjective to a noun, it usually connotes a sub-set of the group represented by the noun, not something opposite to the adjective-less noun.

Do you understand what connote means?

Yes, one can immigrate legally and illegally.  My contention is when used with out the modifier it is generally understood to refer to the legal kind.  Just as it is generally understood to refer to a human instead of an Martian or a bacteria.

And I disagree - when I hear someone talking about "immigration" to a given country, I understand that to mean both legal and illegal immigration, unless the context specifically implies otherwise (e.g. the data being used is clearly stated to be the official numbers).