Man skal være politiker, for at tro, de er kommet for at blive gode skatteborgere

Alt for mange Mellemøstlige der er kommet til Europa, er virkelig ikke kommet for at blive gode skatteborgere. Man skal være politiker, for at tro det. De er kommet for at blive maksimalt rige så hurtigt som muligt og på en hvilken som helst måde.

De har set en guldmine,  de er kommet for at plyndre den, og Vesteuropæiske politikere og EU blotlægger os for kolonisering og plyndring. Tidligere kaldte man det landsforræderi, men kategorierne er i skred. Islam er et socialt opløsningsmiddel, og globalisterne kender et effektivt redskab, når de ser det. Vore nationer er under opløsning, og det er lige det, der er meningen. Politikerne bliver ikke straffet af uvidende vælgere, så hvorfor skulle de holde op med at forråde os?

Det ses også jævnligt i danske retssale, alle tænkelige former for etnisk, økonomisk svindel. Det er ren, arabisk maffia, der betragter vore lande som et let bytte. (Beute=bytte). Programmet blev sendt på ARD i går aftes. Man kan støtte sig på tyske undertekster i videoen, eller se den direkte på ARD her.

Pressedækningen af programmet i dag er omfattende. Se også sagen om dommer Kirsten Heisig, Berlin, som vi skal tro, begik selvmord. Kirsten Heisig: Var det selvmord? Al sandsynlighed taler for, at hun blev myrdet af de araberklaner, hun retsforfulgte.

Den herskende klasse, skal således ikke tro, den er hinsides repressialier. Der er mange, der ønsker dens skalpe. Begynd at løbe, nogen vil fange dem og drage dem til ansvar. En med benene på nakken kan studeres for tiden, han hedder Stefan Löfven.

Princeton Study: Social Benefits Attract Immigrants
by Maja Brankovic. Frankfurter Allgemeine: Sozialleistungen locken Zuwanderer.

November 19, 2019

Until now, scientific studies have shown only a weak causal relationship of receiving social welfare payments on the willingness to immigrate. A team of researchers has now investigated it using Denmark as an example and observed some surprises.

Many refugees only make their way to Europe because they know that they can collect lavish social benefits here. This thesis is particularly persistent in the immigration debate — but this so-called “pull effect” of the welfare state is controversial in research. Many studies to date have at best pointed to a low magnetic effect of generous social welfare payments.

Significantly fewer immigrants since the Danish government cut benefits

Surveys of people from countries such as Syria or Eritrea, for example, have shown that immigration policy in destination countries is only one factor among many — and not the most important of all.

A group of researchers led by Princeton economist Henrik Kleven now counters this skepticism about the pull of a strong welfare state with hard figures from Denmark: According to the figures, there have been significantly fewer immigrants from countries outside the EU every year since the Danish government cut benefits specifically for migrants from this group.

The researchers selected Denmark for two reasons in order to find out what influence the level of social benefits has on migration decisions: Firstly, the small country, with a population of just over five and a half million, has a welfare state that is even more developed than in other Scandinavian countries — a circumstance that could be particularly tempting for immigrants, as the researchers write in their study, which has just been published as a working paper at the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Secondly, there have been several cuts in social policy in recent years: the first in 2002, when the newly elected centre-right government cut social benefits for foreigners from outside the EU by up to 50 per cent; the second in 2012, when the newly elected centre-left government withdrew the law; and the third in 2015, when the centre-right government regained power and reintroduced its 2002 regulation.

In addition, the phases of more restrictive social policy were promoted aggressively: With the 2015 change, for example, the Danish government launched an advertising campaign in Lebanese newspapers explicitly drawing attention to the cuts in benefits for immigrants from non-EU countries, using to the motto: “There will be less money here in the future.”

The effect the researchers found in the data was large. With the reduction in social benefits for non-EU nationals in 2002, net immigration from this immigrant group decreased by 5,000 persons per year compared to average annual migration movements before the change in the law.

And that’s not all: when the centre-left government reversed the law, immigration figures from the affected group of countries immediately rose again — to almost the same level as before.

More Danish citizens with a migration background emigrated to Sweden

Measured against the fact that before the first policy change only around 135,000 from the countries concerned lived in Denmark at all, the difference was considerable. Panu Poutvaara, a migration researcher at the Ifo Institute in Munich, also points to the redirection effects of Denmark’s tightened immigration policy. “It is plausible that following the policy change many of these people didn’t stay in the country, but went to other EU countries instead,” he says.

In a study published in 2018, a team led by the Ifo researcher Till Nikolka demonstrated a similar effect when examining the consequences of tightening the family reunification rule in Denmark. According to the study, not only have fewer people come to Denmark as a result of the change in the law — in particular, significantly more Danish citizens with a migration background emigrated to Sweden because there were less strict family reunification rules there.

Oversat fra tysk på Welfare Acts as a Magnet for Migrants — Who Knew?