Western Futures: Protection Money for Migrants to Prevent Rioting

The future of mass migration looks like this: to prevent riots, taxpayers' will hand over 'protection money' to unwilling migrants to keep them dependent but calm

Today, we’ll take another look at mass migration, specifically, at what happens after a country has already taken in any number of migrants. In many ways, this is a follow-up to the below-linked posting from last week.

Replacement Migration in Practice: Official Data show Austria took in 3.34m Immigrants Since 2000

First, a seemingly at-first hilarious example of what is often explained to the public as ‘the most educated immigration of all time’, which comes from Austria and features an Afghan man who refused to attend language classes because he was ‘too tired’.

It is followed by a piece about labour market integration of ostensibly more compatible migrants, which comes from Norway and documents the quite low rate of Ukrainians of whom a mere quarter are working.

Both beg the question raised fairly recently by Dutch researchers who asked: how (much longer) to pay for all this largesse? Find out ‘more’ here:

Dutch Researchers Reveal the True Cost of Mass Immigration

All non-English content comes to you in my translation, with emphases [and commentary] added.

---

‘Too tired’ to Study: After Skipping German Classes, Afghan Sues to Obtain Full Welfare Benefits

By Andreas Moser, Kronen-Zeitung, 16 Sept. 2024 [source]

A well-educated [sic] Afghan skipped a language course in Innsbruck, which resulted in his welfare benefits [Mindestsicherung, a kind of guaranteed minimum income] being cut. The man filed a complaint and the court ultimately decided whether he was ‘too tired’ to attend the course [I’m still marvelling at this man’s chuzpah, and I’m virtually certain he didn’t come up with this idea by himself].

The holder of a vocational diploma arrived in the country in 2021 and is a recognised asylum seeker [which means his asylum application is—still (!!!)—pending after three years]. He lives in a rented flat with his wife and three children and receives 649 euros a month in welfare benefits in addition to other assistance [since he’s in Innsbruck, which is one of the more expensive places to live in, I’m virtually certain someone else pays his rent].

Mandatory German Classes for Integration

The Afghan was then assigned a German course (A1) [this is the entry-level, and A1 refers to the Common Framework for Languages; description of skills here] lasting almost five months. He attended 51 of the 171 lessons and was absent 117 times without justification. He cited a surgery and the birth of his third child as reasons why the authorities reduced his minimum benefit by 25% (162 euros). The cancellation was subsequently reversed.

Assessment of his Motivation: ‘Weak’

However, the man only attended 174 of 240 lessons of the subsequently assigned new A1 course. In the assessment, the point ‘motivation and participation in the course’ is labelled ‘weak’ and there is no evidence the man passed the course [so, get this: this dude from Afghanistan receives benefits for three years, and on top of it he’s required to learn the language, which he doesn’t do—this means he’s basically incapable of functioning in Austria: watch what followed next].

Appeal to the State Administrative Court

Once again, the authorities reduced benefits by 25%, but the man, entitled [orig. berechtigt] to apply for asylum, appealed to the state administrative court.

In an oral hearing, he justified his absence with the travelling time to the course. He commented on his poor attendance: ‘The baby didn’t sleep and I was tired.’ [this is hilarious, isn’t it? I wonder who among the integration/refugee NGO crowd told the man to file a complaint with the Administrative Court, or Verwaltungsgericht; these administrative laws are full of nooks and crannies, esp. once means-tested welfare benefits are concerned, and their understanding typically requires a lot of time and, often, legal help—remember: that Afghan can’t read, write, or speak German, let alone understand its legalese variety; in addition, let’s wait for all the woke empathy-spewing folks, esp. feminists, to weigh in on the ‘man too tired for German classes because of his baby’ trope—so far, the silence is overwhelming].

Court: Language Course is Reasonable in Any Case

The state administrative court dismissed the appeal [at least something useful]. It said that the man with a good educational background (he is trilingual [but doesn’t want to learn German]) could be expected to attend the course in any case—‘especially as the plaintiff’s wife is not working either’. Conclusion: The state does not allow itself to be completely fooled…

---

Intermission

Note the word ‘completely’ in the final sentence.

The public has already been defrauded massively, and the gov’t continues to gaslight the public about the benefits of mass migration.

Note the reference by the administrative court to that man being ‘trilingual’. That’s his ‘qualification™’ now? We never hear anything about his educational attainment that made him eligible for asylum in the first place.

I’m coming out strongly now by stating that after three years of being ‘entitled to apply for asylum’, the fact that his case hasn’t been processed stinks to high heaven. Imagine, for a moment, if, say, politically persecuted Soviet dissidents like Solzhenitsyn would have to be in limbo for three years.

Wouldn’t it be nice if we had migrants of a more compatible cultural background? Well, if the below evidence from Norway is any guide, you’re in for a surprise.

---

How Fredrikstad Managed to Get More Ukrainians to Work

By Siw Mariann Strømbeck, NRK, 17 Sept. 2024 [source]

Only one in four Ukrainians in Norway is working. Fredrikstad has managed to reverse the trend.

‘I started here in November last year. It was important for me to find work quickly’, says Iryna Kotovska. She had to flee her house, job, and homeland when war broke out in Ukraine in 2022. Today she lives in Fredrikstad and works at Trara School.

At the school, she is one of three Ukrainian assistants responsible for the eight Ukrainian pupils at the school. ‘It gives the children a sense of security to be met by someone with the same mother tongue.’ [it is unclear if she or the children speak Ukrainian, Russian, or both]

‘It's easier for them to open up to us. We understand them, we’ve experienced the same things they have in Ukraine. Children need to vent their feelings and thoughts, and they do that best in their mother tongue’, says Kotovska [true enough, but it doesn’t answer the one relevant question: if only 1 in 4 Ukrainians is working, what do the other 75% do?].

Even though she doesn’t speak perfect Norwegian, she has been thrown into the labour market. This has been one of the keys to success for Ukrainians in Fredrikstad [which also means employers get well-educated people and can pay them less because they’re not employed in the same positions as they were in Ukraine].

Far Above the National Average

In total, the municipality of Fredrikstad has settled 462 Ukrainian refugees since Russia launched a full-scale invasion [sic] of Ukraine. And the Østfold municipality has been very successful in getting the new residents into work.

The road to success has been as easy as it is difficult.

‘Get them into work as quickly as possible. Even if your Norwegian isn’t perfect yet’, says Karianne Vestberg Løkke.

She is staff manager for labour and inclusion at NAV [Norway’s welfare insurance and labour service] Fredrikstad.

Løkke explains that all Ukrainians who come to Norway as refugees start on an introductory course. It lasts for about a year, and she adds:

We then map the individual's resources in relation to skills and education from their home country [that’s actually a good idea].

Their education is then translated so that it is recognised in Norway. We then look for an employer match so that they can get back to work as quickly as possible.

‘If they get into work, they learn more and often learn Norwegian faster’, says Løkke [which makes the case of Iryna Kotovska very different from the Afghan man we encountered above: the latter doesn’t want to work].

And this formula has yielded results.

46% of Ukrainians in Fredrikstad have found work in the past year. According to NAV, this is well above the national average of 25%.

Only 1 of 4 Ukrainians are Working Nationwide

Fredrikstad’s success in integrating Ukrainian refugees is largely due to good co-operation between NAV, the municipality, and public and private employers [I wonder if some of these jobs aren’t also subsidised].

‘It’s a win-win situation for all parties. Ukrainians often have the education and expertise we need’, says Løkke. Fredrikstad is now aiming for 50% of Ukrainians to be in work by the end of 2024.

Figures from Statistics Norway show that there are just over 47,000 Ukrainians aged 20 to 66 in Norway. Preliminary figures for July show that only one in four are currently working.

However, the statistics show that refugees from Ukraine are employed more quickly than others.

The Minister Praises the Work [welcome to North Korea]

The government’s goal is to get as many Ukrainians as possible into work as quickly as possible. The so-called introduction programme has now become more work-focussed and the Norwegian language training more flexible by making it easier to combine Norwegian language training with work.

Minister of Labour and Social Inclusion Tonje Brenna (Ap) praises the work in Fredrikstad:

I’m pleased that Fredrikstad has been so successful in getting many Ukrainians into work. This is important for solving the many tasks facing the city and the region.

We know that there is a great demand for labour in both the business sector and the health and care sector, and that many Ukrainians have precisely the skills we need [what a fortunate coincidence; who’s going to rebuild Ukraine, by the way?]

Hunting for Employers

NAV in Fredrikstad is constantly looking for employers who can offer jobs or work training. Løkke:

We are a region with a major labour shortage, and it is precisely this reserve of labour that we need to find.

More employers should recognise the opportunities here. It's important that small, medium-sized, and large companies see NAV as a recruitment or inclusion partner [I understand the function of such gov’t agencies, but do these companies continue to be ‘private’ concerns? I mean, what happens in a downturn when some of these employees are laid off?].

Morten André Johnsen Rummelhoff, headmaster at Trara School, praises the co-operation with NAV and the municipality [well, a municipal school isn’t a private business of any size, isn’t it?].

He is very pleased with the three new employees from Ukraine:

These are highly educated people. They are trained teachers and child psychologists at bachelor’s and master’s level from their home country. They are skilled and hard-working, and the assistants have been worth their weight in gold for Trara School [I don’t doubt that assessment, but remember: they are now employed—and therefore paid—way below their skill/competence level: this is wage dumping sold to you as major contribution, and to add insult to injury, since this is a municipal school, the tax payer also foots the bill].

In time, Iryna Kotovska hopes to work as a teacher, but for now she is happy to work as an assistant until her Norwegian language skills are good enough [fair enough]:

I learn Norwegian every day at work. From colleagues and pupils. It takes time, but I'm getting better and better every day [surely, that kind of immigrant is preferable to others, but how common is this?].

---

Bottom Lines

There’s no good solution to any of these issues. So many people have already come to Western countries, it’s hard, if not outright impossible, to imagine that even a sizeable fraction of them—say, 20%—will be deported. Let alone lingering questions like: are Western countries actually capable of doing so?

Imagine, for the sake of the argument, that a gov’t wishes to deport 20% of these recent migrants: the logistics are awful—which ones get to stay, who will be deported? Then there’s the question how many countries these people would have to be deported to, a commensurate amount of arrangements for them, their dependents (would be quite unfair to their children who came here without having had a say), and, lastly, imagine the security services required to do so.

For the sake of the argument, let’s not forget that, historically, both Germany and the Soviet Union in the 1930s and 1940s rounded up people and put them into concentration camps, but these people were indeed very small minorities compared to, say, some 16-17% of the overall population (in Norway’s case) or the 20-25% of non-nationals in other European countries.

As a thought experiment, could you imagine police escorting, say, Afghans or other migrants to army trucks and busses waiting outside the apartment complex to take these people to the airport and fly them out?

I can’t, and I doubt it’s feasible for more than a moment.

A few years ago, Austrian authorities deported a teen to Georgia (in the Caucasus, not the US state) whose parents had outlived their legal right to stay. One girl. It took countless police officers, there were protests in favour of that girl (whose German is better than that of most ‘natives’), and she was eventually granted asylum via and expedited route and returned.

Imagine the chaos and anarchy if one would try to deport, say, 40,000 Afghans or 65,000 Syrians.

It’s simply not feasible, hence it won’t happen.

Like Sweden, Norway is offering cash payments for those who wish to ‘repatriate’ on their own volition. Such programmes will attract a few; another small share will aspire to integrate more fully, such as Iryna Kotovska, and they will never return to their home country (which paid for their education). The majority will continue to stay and—do nothing but receive welfare benefits.

This begs two obvious question: first, what will that latter—largest—category of ‘migrants’ do once a gov’t determines to cut benefits? Re-read the first piece and try to come up with any sensible answer that doesn’t involve ‘problems’. I can’t, hence we’ll have to come to terms with the permanent, semi-literate underclass of welfare recipients we’ll have to subsidise ad infinitum lest they riot in the streets. Talk about ‘protection money’, paid by law-abiding tax-payers.

Second, if ‘the West’ continues to import migrants en masse, what will happen to the countries these people left behind? I mean, sure, right now there’s plenty of humans to go around, but fertility is declining rapidly ‘even’ in Sub-Saharan Africa, and in the medium-term, those countries ‘exporting’ people will face significant labour shortfalls and turn into (even more) failed states.

At some point, this madness will (have to) cease.

The carnage until then will be a sight to behold.