Listen to this so called journalist

[ډګروال]

'Muslims won't win against the West' - YouTube

[Khostai]

LOL first christian then atheist then muslim and then again christian :P.
He is the reason that I never cheer when I hear that some peopel sudenly turned to Islam, they use religion like fashion, I bet he turned in to Islam during the whole freedom fighters hype against the Sovjest in Afghanistan, and then after 9/11 he returned to christianity :P.

[khushal]

^^so why did he move towards atheism and back to christianity? was it the whole salman rushdie hype or the whole george bush hype where he said that God was his hero.

But the guy is an idiot, Europe needs immigrants because its econmy demands it and the poor economically weak nations in the middle East and Africa can supple them. Its not because Europeans are Saints. Somebody tell this idiot that its supply and demand.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

That was in 1950's Khushal, now the labor dynamics of Europe have changed, they don't need Middle Easterners to do menial jobs to run their economy. European economies now a days center around intellectual merit and technological innovation. ALL Modern Economies do. There are other immigrants from South America, Easter Europe and even Africa from non-Muslim countries who immigrate and assimilate.

Your analysis is dated and unfounded.

Other than this goofball saying he changed religions more than his underwear. I think his argument is sound, Muslims in Europe are a burden and not an asset and that they should be forced to leave. Of course the exceptions like Albania and Bosnia, those people are natives there. But immigrants should leave.

It makes sense since Most Muslims think those societies are wrong for how they do things.

[khushal]

That was in 1950's Khushal, now the labor dynamics of Europe have changed, they don't need Middle Easterners to do menial jobs to run their economy. European economies now a days center around intellectual merit and technological innovation. ALL Modern Economies do. There are other immigrants from South America, Easter Europe and even Africa from non-Muslim countries who immigrate and assimilate.

Your analysis is dated and unfounded.

Other than this goofball saying he changed religions more than his underwear. I think his argument is sound, Muslims in Europe are a burden and not an asset and that they should be forced to leave. Of course the exceptions like Albania and Bosnia, those people are natives there. But immigrants should leave.

It makes sense since Most Muslims think those societies are wrong for how they do things.

controlled population increase is necessary and an asset to modern economies. Sure the immigrants are unskilled labor, but modern econamies turn unskilled labor assets to skilled labor assets. The problem is that people in modern econmies are not having enough children so a steady increase in population is not met, the only alternative is to allow immigrants to enter. The social policies of increasing incentive to have children(such as more subsidy would be given to people with more children, subsidized education and healthcare) was designed to motivated native europeans to have more children but on the contrary it were the immigrants who were having more children and thus gettign incentive for it. They failed to realize that skilled laborors tend to view children as a liability vs asset and unskilled laborors view children as an asset since they are getting subsidy from the government.

As far as your comment about muslims thinking those societies are bad, they only think that because of the culture shock they experience. Even non muslims think that when they first see it. America and Canada does a far better job of integrating its immigrants than europe and I think its because America and Canada has had a longer experiences with immigration.
Also the only reason these feeling are on the rise is because of the tough economic times. Most economists would tell you that those feeling are temperary since free market economies tend to correct themselves eventually.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

It's very easy to replace unskilled labor though, all the poor Africans, South Americans and Eastern Europeans are more viable than Muslims. Muslims in Europe are useless. Except POSSIBLY and I'm really shaky on this one, POSSIBLY Albanians and Bosnians. POSSIBLY. Moroccans, Afghans, Turks and various nationalities Arabs in Europe are basically Ghetto trash.

While I agree with you that skilled laborers tend to eschew having larger families, but that has often to do with better health and lifestyle conditions, they can live comfortably with ample recreational time which they can invest in themselves. Most Muslims come from countries with generally poor health conditions; even the Muslims raised in Europe tend to have a lower quality of life, standard of living and thus tend to die sooner than their European counter parts. So the impending need for having children is greatly reduced, It wouldn't surprise me if the average 40 Year old European is at the health of a 20 year old Muslim.


I don't care why Muslims think those societies are bad, they think its bad, they should go to an environment better suited for them. I would have a different view if the Muslims in Europe had their act together and were doing something that would benefit the Ummah and counter balancing European Imperial enterprise and capyalism, but they're not doing anything except mindless acts of hooliganism.

[khushal]

It's very easy to replace unskilled labor though, all the poor Africans, South Americans and Eastern Europeans are more viable than Muslims. Muslims in Europe are useless. Except POSSIBLY and I'm really shaky on this one, POSSIBLY Albanians and Bosnians. POSSIBLY. Moroccans, Afghans, Turks and various nationalities Arabs in Europe are basically Ghetto trash.

While I agree with you that skilled laborers tend to eschew having larger families, but that has often to do with better health and lifestyle conditions, they can live comfortably with ample recreational time which they can invest in themselves. Most Muslims come from countries with generally poor health conditions; even the Muslims raised in Europe tend to have a lower quality of life, standard of living and thus tend to die sooner than their European counter parts. So the impending need for having children is greatly reduced, It wouldn't surprise me if the average 40 Year old European is at the health of a 20 year old Muslim.


I don't care why Muslims think those societies are bad, they think its bad, they should go to an environment better suited for them. I would have a different view if the Muslims in Europe had their act together and were doing something that would benefit the Ummah and counter balancing European Imperial enterprise and capyalism, but they're not doing anything except mindless acts of hooliganism.

True but policy makers dont want one group to get too large in thier own native lands. They would rather have diverse groups. If you have one group, they tend to have more influence on the native population but a diverse group tend to have less influence on the native population and the reverse happens where the native population has influence on the immigrant one.
Older and unhealthy immigrants tend to be a burden on the economy but we are talking about long term. As long as they are having kids which the economy demands, the economy doesnt care.

Right now in america there is debate about latino population getting too large and from population charts it seems it wont be too long before they are the majority in the country.
The europeans view their muslim population as a threat to them overtaking them in numbers in their own native lands and the white americans view the latinos as a threat of over taking them in numbers

[RevolutionThroughReason]

those kids in Muslim cases tend to be dependent on public welfare and thus the economy does care, such a thing is a drain. Having more kids is not an economic solution in a MODERN Economy; anyone who argues such has never taken an economics class or read a book on it. It's pretty simple kids demand resources and contribute little. In an Agrarian economy you put those kids straight to work so they start earning their keep. Granted in Europe there are multitudes of child labor laws.

The young Muslims become old Muslims and they tend to die out younger, I am pretty sure the average lifespan of a Muslim in Europe is smaller than Europeans. The age which they're a burden is predominantly between birth to 50 years of age.

Europe will be missing nothiing of Muslims left and I'm sure the "diversity" issue you present, which isn't really an accepted sociological view, can be replaced by diverse Non-Muslim immigration.

There's no need for Muslims in Europe.

[khushal]

^^so you havent read an economic book then?

Usually most of the kids that grow up in modern economies dont tend to be dependent on subsidies. They actually contribute to the economy. The vast majorty of the Afgan, Pakistani, Indian kids I know who grew up in America are very skilled and contribute much to the society they live in. The only afghans, pakistani and indian I know that take subsidy are the ones who are old, and speak hardly any English.

The biggest factor in china, india, brasil economic rise is that fact they have large populations and they are on the path of turning those large population into skilled labor who are building infrastructure that are energy efficient. The key to strong economic growth is producing as much as possible with as little energy as possible and you could only do that with skilled labor. The more skilled labor you have, the stronger your economy.

Your last statement: they had the same view for jews and gypsies back in the 1920's and 1930's who the europeans considered useless trash. A modern economy can turn anyone into a skilled efficient laboror.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

How would you conclude that when I'm arguing the contrary to your position which is what I was referring to as being not in sync with economic principles. What you're saying is false in Europe's case especially, Muslims in Europe have generations of Welfare users and public state dependence.

China and India are still largely Agrarian Societies although they're changing, but they also have a growing educated sector and growing middle class and more over their labor force is SKILLED, they are able to do trades, farm and many other things. None the less using their economic models and applying them to Europe just demonstrates complete ignorance of Economics.

People in Europe STILL consider Gypsies Trash and in Europe they resented the Jews because they were jealous of their success. Quite the opposite. If Muslims were at that stage in Europe I'd tell Muslims to stay and clown those European rats, but that's NOT the case.

America is a different case, MOST of the Pakistanis and Indians who migrate to America COME from the Middle Class Sectors. My father's family are considered upper Middle Class to Wealthy for Afghan standards my mother's family are well off. The problem with American Afghans is that they're SPOILED BRATS and end up wasting their lives and working at Pizza Shops at least that's the case for East Coast Afghan Males, especially Pashtuns, they're too busy jacking off to fantasies of being a Hip Hop Artist haha.

but the fact you have to draw on America to make your case for Europe just demonstrates how failed the argument for Muslims in Europe actually is.

Muslims have failed and sadly will continue to do so.

[khushal]

Economic principles work the same whether in europe or in America. It is the social policies that are to be blamed. I said this in the above post, that America does a better job of integrating its immigrants than the europeans.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/75...en-its-borders

economists have long argued that immigration encourages innovation and creates jobs. Immigrants have started almost half of America’s venture-funded businesses; more than 40% of the country’s Fortune 500 companies were founded by an immigrant or an immigrant’s child. Thirdly, when it comes to the argument of unskilled migrants and asylum seekers, 80% of asylum seekers are actually absorbed by developing countries, and not the EU even though the EU claims to welcome those fleeing persecution.
As economic power shifts to the East, and the West undergoes a long and painful deleveraging process while struggling with unfavorable demographics, the West needs to open its borders to encourage growth, not stymie it. It is also important to foster stronger communication between the regions by employing immigrants in order to strengthen trade relations.
There are already signs that the immigration trend has begun to shift the opposite way, as a series of articles points out the West is losing its best talent as reverse brain-drain occurs. People are moving to emerging markets to start businesses and take advantage of their booming economies as they fail to find employment in their own countries. The West must work harder to encourage immigration if it expects the East to welcome its citizens a few decades down the line.

My argument about the jews and gypsies was to put attention that people like to blame someone for the problems facing them. Before it was the jews and gypsies, now its the muslims. The last time europe became xenophobic, it lost its position as a power and was divided up by the Soviets and the Americans.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Again study the context, they're talking about Immigrants who have developed skills, and created innovations, most of the immigrants in America work skilled labor , agrculture or assembly lines and better yet THEY PAY TAXES and DO NOT CONSUME from the welfare funds!!!!

This isnt the same for Muslims, who consume and contribute practically nothing in Europe. You're comparing the broad benefits of Immigration and analogizing that with Muslims. Indians, and other groups generally contribute to their societies. Muslims burden their host cultures. I don't think the EU would repel Indians, Indians who migrate are generallywell educated

People like to blame someone else, but sometimes that blame is right in the case of Muslims it's right. Even in the case of Jews it was right, but it was because the Jews had economic power. In fact your article actually proves my case that Muslims are dispensable for Europe...and rightfully so; I honestly hope they start forcing Muslims out.

No one likes Muslims; because Muslims are spoiled brats!

[khushal]

Economists argue that positions of labor should be based on merit no matter if the person is native or not. The guy in the video is arguing that it should be offered to the native first even though a person from another country who has applied is more qualified and could probably produce more for less. This kind of thinking actually decreases economic output. You are ignoring the fact that those immigrants also consume which create jobs and contribute to economic output.
The majority of Indian and paksitani immigrants are not middle class to upperclass educated/skilled people. Many work at 7elevans and motels. The majority of the ones you speak(skilled/educated) of are here on temporary work visas.

[Tjanaparh]

Dear RTR, the people who live in Europe on wellfare and on the other hand feel superior are however not specifically Muslim - there are enough people from eastern europe, and even from my country who do the same. This does depend much on the parents. Also I know the specific counterexamples from my school in Germany, my Afghan clasmates got much more skilled and educated than the average germans.

[abassinafghan]

ulfkotte is far right nazi author who together with others are heavly attacking islam in general , as foreigners and poor people . but mostly muslims .

the sad thing is , this man is not convinced what he is saying but actually know that it is nonsence .

and the people buy his books full of conspirency , in some books he actually propagate civil war as a solution .

the question is who is paying him !!!