Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilja
But in the end, the last statistic I read from 2016 said out of 162,000 refugees that came in 2015, only 494 got a job ( https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/1...-500-fick-jobb ). And, so far, out of all these "youths" coming to Sweden, most that were tested (and they have to agree to be tested) were found to be above 18.
I realize this is a rant, but it is tiring. I realize that there are many refugees who come here who need to come here. But when you work 40-60 hours a week and realize that the people living next door to you have their lifestyle completly financed by your taxes while you have to pay for it..well you get a bit annoyed. The fact that the vast majority follow Islam is just fuel for the fire. And if you point that out, suddenly you are a racist. |
To your first part, those numbers are a tad misleading:
https://www.economist.com/news/finan...ees-sweden-are
Doesn't mean the lower participation rate isn't a problem, but the context behind the numbers is faulty. The actual foreign-borne participation rate in the workforce is 63-65%, compared to 76-77% for native born Swedes. The phrasing of your statistic (and the parroting of the number on the Daily Caller and Brietbart) implies that immigrants/migrants/refugees/foreign-born residents participate at less than a 1% rate in the workforce, as a whole.
Things that aren't considered: 1. Not speaking the language. 2. Not reading the language 3. Likely having spent the past the past three months prior to arriving in Sweden running from some smugglers and to others. 4. Likely having spent the past three months prior to arriving in Sweden living in an active warzone. 5. Swedish cultural bias towards native born Swedes for open jobs (by the way, I'm not making a moral judgment here - even me, on my liberal "high horse" prefer the company of like-minded people who share my cultural and aesthetic values).
Point being, when you see a statistic that scream "foreigners are weird, feckless, and only harm their new communities", take a second and see if the context of that statistic is being manipulated. To judge the influx of a couple hundred thousand refugees, many fleeing from civil war and ethnic cleansing, as a failure after the first year or two is ahistorical. This is not to say that
maybe, on balance, these new arrivals will be bad for Sweden in the long term. But that would buck a global trend of immigration being a net positive for the communities that embrace it.
To the second quoted paragraph, I fail to see how identifying them as Muslim affects your argument in any way. Unless you're saying that because they are Muslim they are incapable of being productive members of Swedish society?