This idea was floated by the Sarkozy government in France some months ago, but I don't think anything came of it. In any case, it's nice work if you can get it. I expect that it will create a revolving-door growth industry, with unassimilable immigrants getting paid, going home, coming back, getting paid again, going home again, etc. Still, this is positive -- it is among the first official recognition that there is any problem at all with immigrants who won't assimilate.
"Denmark to pay immigrants £12,000 to go home if they 'can't or won't' assimilate," by Allan Hall for the Daily Mail, November 10 (thanks to all who sent this in):'
Denmark is boosting cash incentives to entice immigrants to return to their homelands if they 'can't or won't' assimilate into society.The offer now on the table is close to £12,000 for every person who takes up the offer to leave.
Critics of the measure say it sends the wrong message to foreigners but the centre-right government in Copenhagen is forging ahead with the plan.
The financial carrot is ten times more than that previously offered under a scheme which as been law since 1997.
'We thought it was important to substantially increase this aid so that immigrants who want to return home because they are not able to adapt to Danish society have a strong financial basis to start a new life,' said foreign affairs spokesman Soeren Espersen of the far-right Danish People's Party....
Solution: finger-print those who participate in the program, create a data-base, and forcibly expel any repeaters without compensation.
That sounds easy enough. I like this plan
Cornelius : Solution: finger-print those who participate in the program, create a data-base, and forcibly expel any repeaters without compensation.
That would be great if it worked, but as we've seen from CA and the endless deluge of illegals coming across the border, it doesn't always work.
Simple.
Stop immigration of muslims so no question of anyone coming back.
What a concept! Just think of the possibilities...enact a surcharge on [something? anything!] to fund this in the USA.
Only if you leave and never come back. I think the price is a little high - how about a couple of goats and a pair of new sandals?
Oh, my god, am I practicing Islamophobe? It's okay, I've read the Qur'an.
$20,000 dollars?
That is far too much. And such a large sum, to people who have done absolutely nothing to deserve it except manage, by hook or by crook, to arrive in Denmark (or other non-Muslim lands), will do the following:
1) encourage more and more people to try to come, because now they will be assured, at a minimum, of clearing $20,000, which for many is practically half-a-lifetime's earnings.
Arrive first, then bring the wives, bring the kids, and then have each of them apply for the $20,000.
2) break the bank of many Western countries, and not only at Monte Carlo. Just too much money.
How about another way to do things:
Ending all Muslim immigration as a national security and civilisational survival matter.
Preventing money coming from rich Muslims abroad to pay for mosques, madrasas, and so on.
Forbidding the constructio of minarets, and requiring a clear reciprocity from Muslim nations -- that is, they must allow the building of churches, in equal measure, and before any new mosques are built, given that there are already thousands in the Western world, at least a thousand or so must go up in the Muslim world.
Requiring that everything that goes on in mosques be monitored, be taped, and relayed in real time to security officials.
Focussing anti-fraud efforts on Muslims taking advantage, and then some, of every possible entitlement program, making sure that there is less fiddling of the system, and that everyone involved in such fiddling faces jail.
Giving those Muslims given jail terms the option of leaving, with their families, never to return.
Forbidding the wearing of the hijab in state schools, and at places of government work, and permitting private employers to ban the hijab, or any other garb, or activity -- including those prayers that Muslims insist they should be allowed, even in the middle of a work day, even if at a factory, no matter where they are, to engage in, within societies founded, developed, and kept afloat by non-Muslims who would not have received the civilisational legacy they have received, had they been Muslims in a Muslim society, where no such legacy exists but only Islam, Islam, Islam.
There's more.
But that's a start, to whet mental appetites.
Just use your well-prepared mind, your well-exercised imagination.
Off topic but...
I wonder if the heroin that Billie Holiday was addicted to was imported from islamicstan?
Ah, the Homeric epithet.
"Wily" Odysseus.
"Grey-eyed" Athena.
That "wine-dark" sea.
And, don't leave journalistic home without it, the "far-right" Danish People's Party.
First...you must plug up the leak and then you can begin bailing.
Like Khushi said, they just need to stop them from entering their nation. There is no need for Muslims to be in Europe, anyways.
NO, No, no!! People you have it all wrong! We must tax muslims that won't assimilate.
If we don't assimilate to islam:
009.029
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
The problem with this carrot approach is obvious: only those nascent (or even current but closet) terrorists who want the money will leave, while the nascent (and even current but closet) terrorists who would rather stay and continue plotting mass-murder will stay.
(This carrot approach, incidentally, is also a pet idea of the self-style hardliner against Islam, Lawrence Auster, though he thinks because he advocates it in conjunction with vaguely possible forced expulsion, this somehow saves his idea from incoherence.)
example of your refugee convention at work
a Sri Lankan Tamil 'alex' who was convicted of gang related crimes in Canada and deported in 2003 then reappears in 2009 as an asylum seeker on a boat in Indonesia on its way to Australia. His claim for asylum? After having shat in the nest in Canada he had trouble assimilating in Sri Lanka.
this example is just another of many that exposes the scam that is the refugee convention.
the extra 20,000 just greases the wheel of the scam.
How does the saying go? "You get what you pay for"
"Ending all Muslim immigration as a national security and civilisational survival matter."
Ok, so let's play with the idea that Muslim immigration is problematic and will end up with the destruction of Western civilization or some other such nonsense. What's your solution to the problems the West faces if it does NOT engage in immigration? With its low birth rates, European nations will not be able to compete with America and the Far East unless it is able to draw upon an outside workforce (immigrants). Their nations are growing increasingly older with fewer Europeans producing enough offspring to support the aging workforce. Who will put in for their social programs which guarantee health care and other amenities?
You can only get so many immigrants from Eastern Europe, there's little choice at the present time if Europe wants to compete with us. Maybe you should start a counter site to encourage European fertility?
"Preventing money coming from rich Muslims abroad to pay for mosques, madrasas, and so on. "
"Forbidding the constructio of minarets, and requiring a clear reciprocity from Muslim nations -- that is, they must allow the building of churches, in equal measure, and before any new mosques are built, given that there are already thousands in the Western world, at least a thousand or so must go up in the Muslim world."
Why stop with the rich Muslims? Since the culture of the West is at stake we should probably prevent rich Hindus from paying for a new mandir. After all, their religion is not the indigenous faith of the West and will only lead to a further browning and possible disintegration of our values.
Sure! We'll engage in the same ridiculous medieval practices found in the Pact of Umar! That'll show those pesky Muslims who is advanced!
Please, I've said it time and time again, if your message/civilization/religion etc is that superior it should clearly stand out as being the absolute best way of life and people will readily adopt it. Forcing the issue with a downright totalitarian objective is completely contrary to the real values of our civilization. We're totally in agreement that invoking medieval laws has no place in the 21st century, yes? Then criticize the stupidity of such laws abroad but do not bring them HERE.
"Forbidding the wearing of the hijab in state schools, and at places of government work, and permitting private employers to ban the hijab, or any other garb, or activity -- including those prayers that Muslims insist they should be allowed,"
Ban the hijab and you'll hear cries for a ban of other religious articles from both Muslims and atheists. If you're willing to live without a crucifix or kippah then I suppose I could learn to live without tagiyya (that means skullcap, not Islamic deception) but I still say that these articles are completely harmless provided they do not obscure a person in jobs that are security sensitive. In America, such a law could NEVER fly.
As for the prayers, I see this as completely a non issue. You know full well that fard salat requires at a maximum 8 minutes INCLUDING time for wudu. I can even link you fatwas which suggest that wudu can be performed over certain articles of clothing (your socks, for example) so there's absolutely no reason why we need to hear about complaints for foot baths or a bidet. In an average work day, a Muslim will only have 2-3 times for salat. This is comparable to a smoke break, it's totally not a big deal.
Germany's been there, done it.
In the eighties, much higher sums were given to Turks who were willing to settle back in Turkey.
They all took the money and went on an extended holiday.
After that, they all trickled back with the extended families, in some cases whole villages and tribes.
Doesn't work.
Just end Muslim immigration to the West. All others welcomed in an orderly, legal fashion as immigrants might be needed. And even if this isn't enough to keep the birth rate from dropping precipitously (it would be), an underpopulated Europe, hell even no Europe, is better than a Muslim Europe. And you don't get this. Not at all. No country of sense should take in people who adhere to a totalitarian ideology. Therefore, shouldn't take in Marxists, Neo-Nazis or Muslims. Pretty simple. Ain't rocket science here. Just good ole' common sense.
" With its low birth rates, European nations will not be able to compete with America and the Far East unless it is able to draw upon an outside workforce (immigrants)"
From a detractor above.
This is Tariq Ramadans mantra, which is unfortunately parroted by many politicians and the media in the West, as if there was no alternative to Mohammedanism replacing us and everything with it anyway.
Nonsense.
" if your message/civilization/religion etc is that superior it should clearly stand out as being the absolute best way of life and people will readily adopt it. Forcing the issue with a downright totalitarian objective is completely contrary to the real values of our civilization."
Mohammedans will "not readily adopt" our way of life, because they already have an ideology which they believe is superior and meant to replace ours and us along with it.
The rest of your post is uninformed drivel.
GT : Ban the hijab and you'll hear cries for a ban of other religious articles from both Muslims and atheists.
It's a safety issue, no other religion bags its female adherents.
Very simple to implement, and, speaking as an Atheist, there is nothing that I wear that is key to my non-belief.
The rest, as sheik yer'mami so rightly pointed out, is absolute garbage.
The sum of £12,000 need not be payed as a one off. It can staggered over a period of 10 years say. If the person turns up in less then 10 years, he is deported, and no further payments to be made.
"What's your solution to the problems the West faces if it does NOT engage in immigration? With its low birth rates, European nations will not be able to compete with America and the Far East unless it is able to draw upon an outside workforce (immigrants). Their nations are growing increasingly older with fewer Europeans producing enough offspring to support the aging workforce. Who will put in for their social programs which guarantee health care and other amenities?"
Whatever extra labor the Western world once needed, it needs it no longer. The problem everywhere is enormous unemployment. And in any case, the expense, that before was not understood as necessary, and when Muslim populations were much smaller, and much less aggressive, was indeed less necessary, of monitoring Muslim populations, is huge. Huge, too, is the fantastic cost in Western Europe of Muslim criminals, who in the Scandinavian countries make up 60-70% of the rapists, while representing 2-3% of the population, and in all the countries of Europe have rates of criminality (including city-wide acts of vandalism, as in France), and rates of incarceration, that are five to ten times that of non-Muslims, including other (but non-Muslim) immigrant groups, such as Chinese and Hindus. In fact, I suspect the average real cost of each Muslim immigrant is many tens of thousands or perhaps even hundreds of thousands of dollars, and that is why the Danish effort, in one way, as I noted above, is far too generous, but in another, may be seen as greatly contributing to overall cost savings.
Furthermore, there are, should laborers from outside be necessary, large populations in Eastern Europe and Russia, now able to move freely, should the demand be there. And the Italians now have imported devoutly Christian workers from the Philippines, whom many Italian families now employ as domestic help (the "COLF") of various kinds.
Another source of labor, especially for Spain, if it wishes to halt Moroccan and other maghrebin immigration, are Catholic workers from Latin America, who in Spain would fit in -- already many from Ecuador are there -- and elsewhere would be far more able to integrate than Muslims, who to the extent that they remain true to Islam, cannot possibly integrate into an Infidel nation-state as is necessary.
Save for the earliest years of Ludwig Ehrhard's "economic miracle," when single male Turks arrived and were needed, all the other experiences with Muslims who have arrived -- many not needed, and certainly not invited (for god's sake, who invited all the Pakistanis into England? They came because they could, and the phony stories about being "needed" and having somehow done the English (or the French, or the Danish, or the Dutch) a "favor" and so they must not now be turned away, is a complete fabrication, a rewriting of history by Muslims and their apologists. It won't stand up. And the argument that somehow Muslim immigrants -- when there are so many non-Muslim immigrants eager to work, and capable of actually fitting in because they do not carry Islam in their mental baggage -- are needed is absurd.
Doubt GerbilTea will respond again. He's a one hit kind of guy. I mean, what can he say that he hasn't already said, and that quite unconvincingly I might add, to promote the idea of continued Muslim immigration to the West? He's shit out of ideas, as apologists for Islam are very quickly. Ever notice that these apologists for Islam have few reserves to draw upon once their initial unimpressive statement falls flat? Yeah, I'm sure you have, almost an infinite number of times by now. Well, it's burdensome defending an ideology like Islam which is so transparently rotten----and stupid. But I don't feel any sympathy for these rubes. They deserve none.
If the poor sod does post again, it will be wrapped up in insult and emotional crap, nothing more. Same old same old. Damn, Muslim are easy to figure out. What's perplexing are Western dhimmis who should not exist anymore but who do aplenty. General Casey, are you listening here? No, probably not.
"...an underpopulated Europe, hell even no Europe, is better than a Muslim Europe."
Oh, that's just so right.
To think of Muslims defiling wonderful and charming Europe makes me feel like, well, like Oriana Fallaci in "The Rage and The Pride."
If you haven't read it, you must.
The labour force can be drawn from Latin america, Christians from africa, Hindus and Buddhist. It was a big mistake letting muslims in large numbers into Europe, giving away so much money will not solve the problem. They will come in hordes for getting the easy money.Stop muslims from entering the west as they carry a cancer thats contageous islam.
"It was a big mistake letting muslims in large numbers into Europe" - greaticon
How anyone couldn't see that 30 years ago is beyond me.
Oh, that's right - Enoch Powell did and was completely vilified for it. Those who can see into the future usually are by the hoi polloi.
Here's what Bat Ye'or says of Muslim immigration:
"France and the rest of Western Europe cannot change their policy anymore. Their future is Eurabia. Period. I don't see how they can reverse the movement they set in motion thirty years ago. Nor do Eurabians want to modify this policy. It is a project that was conceived, planned and pursued consistently through immigration policy, propaganda, church support, economic associations and aid, cultural, media and academic collaboration."
This is the reality that now exists in Europe. Any thought of reversals is speculative and fanciful. It makes me think of what conversation among Zionists must have sounded like 150 years ago. But there is a big difference in unity, zeal and willingness to sacrifice between Jews and Europeans.
The Danes are fools.
The incompatible immigrants should pay the Danish government for their travel expenses back to their places of origin.
If I remember correctly , the French government offered money years ago to the North Africans who wanted to go back
What happened is that a lot of them took the money under one name , left and came back a few months after under a different name . We remember one guy that did it over 4 times.
It is a good idea but they must be fingerprinted and not allowed to come back
I do not think the future is Eurabia. What we are seeing now is the start of removing Muslims from the West.
This financial incentive is not just mere measure but an indication to Muslims that they are not welcome. It is also an indication that the people and politicians of Denmark, have now made a seismic adjustment to their once PC views. It is happening all over the Europe- Britain in partcular. That is the message of this incentive, not its size or whether it will work or not.
How does the Danish government define those who "can't or won't assimilate"? Is the money offered to all non-citizens of Muslim background? Is it offered only to those non-citizen Muslims who are poor? Is it offered to any non-citizen, of whatever religious background, who is unemployed and on the dole? Is it offered to non-citizens who take a Danish cultural test and fail it?
The details would be interesting.