Be honest. What are the millions of "refugees" gonna do to Syrup's economy?
>>1171418
>millions
More like thousands
>gonna do to Syrup's economy?
Probably nothing significant.
Nothing much.
When did it become millions BTW? Is that the newest /pol/ headline?
>>1171465
That's because they came over illegally, due to being somewhat nearby by land.
Kinda different from when you have to fly them in and when they can just show up.
It's going to eventually become a massive drain on their social services.
The refugees will never be able to become productive citizens, as none of them can speak English or French.
I heard that it costs an estimated 50k per year per refugee, so 10k x 50k is what you have if that number is actually true, and knowing Trudeau, it's very believable that this much money will be spent, but I doubt all of it will go towards the refugees instead of just some slush fund.
The real problems start three generations later, when they have outnumbered the natives and have established Sharia law zones.
Sweden is currently the rape capital of the world and is expected to become a third world country by 2050.
This isn't even /pol/ speak, it's just the plain fact
Eventually Canada will be wholly owned by the Chinese and inhabited solely by Muslims
>>1171475
That's because Sweden's definition of "rape" is skewed. It's much different from Western countries.
Calm down autists the sky isn't falling just yet.
>>1171477
I thought we were having a serious discussion, but it appears you just want to be retarded.
Fuck off cuck
>>1171475
yes it will be a huge drain on Europe and Canada. Another point is the ones who do find honest work tend to work and deal in cash only and do not believe in debt, so they will not contribute to the system or pay much taxes as would normal citizens
>>1171482
How is it denial when there's a major difference between being able to limit the amount of refugees to however many you want because they need to be manually screened and flown in AND having them just show up uninvited? Are you this dumb?
>>1171480
You kind of destroyed and hope of an actual discussion when you started spewing /pol/ memes.
Can you go back there? Stay in your containment board
>>1171482
Sweden charges each sexual crime separately, even it's all done by one person.
It still doesn't change the fact that over half of the rape statistics are committed by immigrants, and the other half are heavily fudged to hide the fact that far more than half the immigrants are responsible for the rapes.
>>1171487
The question was what the millions of "refugees" would do to the economy, not whether they came to Europe legally or not. Stay on topic, please. We are discussing the economic aspects, not the legality.
>>1171487
You're that same butt hurt nigger that always comes into every business politics thread and straw mans until you get a response that allows you to scream /pol/ at.
You need to seriously fuck off back to Plebbit
>>1171497
You didn't phrase it that way.
You phrased it as if there are already millions there or are coming.
Idk it would probably result in higher rates of cucksheds per capita, more halal meat sales, stock of pipebomb and ak-74 companies going up and an increase in the "white genocide" index.
Or that's what the theory the economists at /pol/ seem to propose according to their data of unsourced infographics created by manchildren who are also authors of the popular "MGTOW" literature.
>>1171501
>Mass immigration is good
>White genocide is a meme
>/pol/ is an evil boogeyman
More cucks
>>1171503
I thought this was about Canada?
It would result in more /pol/ butthurt, which is hilarious and a major reason to support it.
>Muh white master race that seems to be dying out! W-we're still superior though... R-right?
>>1171505
ohh
>Syrup
I meant Syria + Europe
I understand the confusion
>>1171465
I thought "syrup" referred to Canada, as in maple syrup; I didn't realise it was a combination of syria and europe. In that case, probably the same effect Mexicans have on the US; if they're responsible for any terrorist attacks in the future (so far all terrorist attacks were caused by people from the country they attacked) then they'll obviously have a bad effect. But I personally think that overall, they will strain countries' welfare systems and will indirectly/unintentionally cause diplomatic tensions between EU nations, which is something they've already done.
>>1171511
>so far all terrorist attacks were caused by people from the country they attacked
No one named Mohammed is from France
>>1171504
>mass immigration is good
Nope
>/pol/ is an evil boogeyman
Nope
>white genocide is a meme
Yep
>>1171514
I meant that as in they have citizenship or at the very least residencies. As far as I know, they weren't refugees.
>>1171517
Thats the point. "Refugee" and "immigrant" are interchangeable.
What's the difference between the Syrian who came to France 5 years ago and the Syrian who is "seeking refuge" today? The latter one hasnt been in France long enough to work up plans to blow up the neighborhood
>>1171521
>>1171522
>Carrying water for liberals
>>1171521
>refugee and immigrant are interchangeable
No they're not. One came legally to his current country of residence and can speak the language (he has to if he's going to get a residency or citizenship), and the other pretty much forced his way in and probably can't speak the language.
>The latter one hasnt been in France long enough to work up plans to blow up the neighborhood
So you believe that refugees are preferable to legal/proper immigrants?
>>1171525
No. I believe they are both Muslim men who idolize a historic figure who went to war with the West and whether or not they speak a European language doesnt change the fact they were raised into a culture from the dark ages
>>1171510
Oh wow, i really found the whole Syrup thing funny
>>1171528
That still doesn't change the fact that there is a difference between immigrants and refugees. Sure, maybe the people themselves aren't any difference but their "status" is different. And since this discussion is about refugees and not immigrants or either one's culture, I'd say that refugees will have less impact on the economy of Europe than people who are (legally) citizens of european countries.
>>1171546
I should clarify: my people who are legally citizens of European countries, I mean immigrants not actual Europeans.
Give it a year or two, and it'll sort itself out. Right now, all of the people who crossed over can be sent back, there's just no point in doing so when you have an open border and they'll just walk right back in. None of them can get citizenship for about 4 years, even if they're stateless.
>>1171677
To answer the question though, assuming it doesn't, we essentially get a new underclass out of the whole thing.
>>1171700
They probably thought syrup meant Canada, just like I, and several other people thought
>>1171418
It's going to further stagnate their economy.
They just imported several million people who came to their countries to live on benefits, have no skills, and can't even speak their language in many cases. Unless there is a massive overhaul of public welfare systems these people will, for the most part, simply live like parasites on their host countries and depending on how often they blow up parts of them potentially turn them into fascist states.
>>1171418
Well, let's look at the demographics of the people.
1. Mostly male
2. Poorer work ethic
3. Violet
This translates to massive welfare payments and low labor participation in mostly unskilled labor. You'll also have security concerns as well as terrorism and crime increases.
What does this mean? Larger government spending and higher taxes. It also means more spending on goods and services. This isn't bad in countries with high savings rates where money isn't being put to good use (Germany). But for other countries with low savings and already high taxes (Greece), this will be bad for the economy.
>>1171505
I did too kek, was like Canada doesn't have it nearly as bad as Europe. Now I get what op means.
Europe is fucked at this point, no point in even concerning yourself with them op.
>>1171972
Do you think they will use it as an excuse to extend the power of governments. Import dangerous people and then claim government needs more power to protect against the dangerous people they just imported?
I personally think that's the end game. It's almost always about control.
>>1171711
Western economies are at this point based around debt-creation and consumption so it doesn't really mater and will just result in more GDP growth which economists want
>>1171972
>It also means more spending on goods and services. This isn't bad in countries with high savings rates where money isn't being put to good use (Germany). But for other countries with low savings and already high taxes (Greece), this will be bad for the economy.
Savings are just the pecuniary accountancy of spending. Savings result from and are simultaneous with the act of spending; it is not an action that precedes and permits spending.
>>1171440
there are well over a million refugees
>>1171992
People spending money they got from the government which took that money from other people while taking their % for performing that service is how you stagnate an economy.
The people getting the money vote/demand more and the people losing the money try to keep it by leaving or making less or just joining the other side. Slowly it grinds to a halt when you cannot tax any more, and can't borrow any more. Then you become Greece.
>>1172006
A government that issues its own currency doesn't need to tax to spend since they can just print as much money as they want and hand it out.
Spending more money can't stagnate an economy since only by stopping spending can you do that. Spending is just direct financing. You just have to worry about managing inflationary pressures which could arise by an increase in the money supply if it isn't going towards increasing real consumption.
Also Greece is a colony of Germany so that's a bad example in comparison to any real first world country which doesn't have to borrow foreign currency to finance itself.
>>1171677
I was saying that in 2011 as I was planning a trip through the levant to visit the crusader cities.
>>1171987
Ultimately yes. Politicians want to stay in power, but people will have different reasons for wanting to have these refugees. Some are:
1. Humanitarian - we have to help everyone because we are all humans
2. Business interests - we want cheap labor and more goods to sell to
3. EU government - We must import voters that don't have nationalist tendencies and derail our project
4. Fix demographic issues - We have a large welfare state and not enough people paying into the system and the fertility rate is too low, immigrants immediately solve this problem
The fatal flaw is that they all think they can become European with liberal European values with enough money and education. They typically are too far away from these people to see the issues with this mindset, but from a computer spreadsheet, it is hard to see.
>>1171992
>Savings are just the pecuniary accountancy of spending. Savings result from and are simultaneous with the act of spending; it is not an action that precedes and permits spending.
It is all about how quickly money churns through the economy. Take an extreme case where the savings rate is 0% (everyone spends money immediately). The economy will still run and grow. Now go the other extreme and say the savings rate is 100%. The economy quickly dies. It's the reason why China is slowing down now. The savings rate is like 40% and they made up for that with exports. The US has only a 5% savings rate and the GDP/capta is much greater.
>>1172052
>They just deal in cash and subsequently create little black markets within their communities
Also a major problem, though some Europeans are no better (thanks to their large regulatory and tax burdens).
>>1172052
That's pretty based.
Maybe we can learn something from the Muslims desu.
>>1172544
kill yourself
whats based is being the banker and making your 3%
>>1172588
>He thinks he will ever be that banker
Nice job whiteknighting tho.
Maybe if you keep defending them they'll give you some of the money they're stealing from people like you
>>1171418
>>1172540
I think Merkel is making a huge mistake, the problem we are told is low birth rates. However, if we look at the history of Western Europe white people have always had a relatively low replacement rate, we might have had 6 kids but generally only 2-3 made it. The major issue Europe faces now that it did not back then is the financing of social services they provide to the elderly, with longer lifespans more younger people will be needed to support these systems. Just like Social Security here in the US. What NEEDS to happen is the programs need to go defunct, we all now Social Security is a ponzi scheme, if we let our population level out the whole system will collapse. Merkel's way around this is to import 3rd world workers, however what she does not realize is when automation replaces their prospective jobs the SHTF. You'll have 1 million extra people living on welfare. Honestly the major domino in this mess will be China, once they're economy tanks we'll see the rest of the world fall.
>>1171418
How were the economies of where they are from?
Oh wait, war is always bad for the economy.
