Sweden’s government on Tuesday said it would put forward a bill introducing a requirement for migrants to adhere to an “honest living” or face deportation.
But then if poverty is the best predictor for crime, that begs the question why would any country want people who are inherently more prone to crime in the first place?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to precisely discourage that type of immigration if you were trying to bring crime down?
The thing about Japan is complex for several reasons. On the one hand, late payments only affect your PR application if they took place within the last two years. So it’s not like you’ll be perma-banned from the PR if you paid your National Health Insurance slip late once because you forgot.
But if you do pay late consistently, that’s when it affects your PR. And again, you need to be consistent for two years to be eligible again.
why would any country want people who are inherently more prone to crime in the first place?
Have you not heard of people trying to escape war or death threats? Countries love to gain highly educated immigrants, but many countries also open their doors in cases of need. And more typically, those tend to be poorer folks. That said, at least for the US, undocumented immigrants tend to commit less crime, although poverty is also a big factor in predicting crime. But it’s complicated and rather more nuanced than simple little pat phrases.
But then if poverty is the best predictor for crime, that begs the question why would any country want people who are inherently more prone to crime in the first place?
Labor? Something something declining birth rates. It’s not like flipping burgers in Berlin or Stockholm will let one live in anything but poverty conditions. That’s what needs to change if you want to reduce crime, not heavy handed enforcement that’s almost always just going to be used as an excuse to harass immigrants. I’m not clear on the details of the Swedish immigration system, but European immigration systems in general definitely don’t need to be more draconian; it’s a solution looking for a problem.
The thing about Japan is complex for several reasons. On the one hand, late payments only affect your PR application if they took place within the last two years.
“Oops, your bill came late, no PR for you for two years” isn’t my idea of a fair or productive system.
But then if poverty is the best predictor for crime, that begs the question why would any country want people who are inherently more prone to crime in the first place?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to precisely discourage that type of immigration if you were trying to bring crime down?
The thing about Japan is complex for several reasons. On the one hand, late payments only affect your PR application if they took place within the last two years. So it’s not like you’ll be perma-banned from the PR if you paid your National Health Insurance slip late once because you forgot.
But if you do pay late consistently, that’s when it affects your PR. And again, you need to be consistent for two years to be eligible again.
Have you not heard of people trying to escape war or death threats? Countries love to gain highly educated immigrants, but many countries also open their doors in cases of need. And more typically, those tend to be poorer folks. That said, at least for the US, undocumented immigrants tend to commit less crime, although poverty is also a big factor in predicting crime. But it’s complicated and rather more nuanced than simple little pat phrases.
Labor? Something something declining birth rates. It’s not like flipping burgers in Berlin or Stockholm will let one live in anything but poverty conditions. That’s what needs to change if you want to reduce crime, not heavy handed enforcement that’s almost always just going to be used as an excuse to harass immigrants. I’m not clear on the details of the Swedish immigration system, but European immigration systems in general definitely don’t need to be more draconian; it’s a solution looking for a problem.
“Oops, your bill came late, no PR for you for two years” isn’t my idea of a fair or productive system.