Its not just about money. Integrating Muslim refugees (well mostly migrants) has proved to be difficult bordering on impossible in Europe. Ghettos, antisemitism, sectarian violence, attempts to impose islamic law on communities etc.

Nonetheless if a refugee asks for asylum in any EU country he will be given asylum in that country. Migrants are different, but since we do not have much of a mechanism for sending them back where they came from... not so very different.

Now some of these migrants and refugees that want to live in Germany and Sweden are supposed to be distributed by "quotas" among the other EU countries, how is that supposed to work in practice?

Dont get me wrong, we have hundreds of thousands of recently (within say 20 years) migrated foreigners in our country, but none of them are bitching about what I eat and drink, how often I pray or what my wife wears to the beach. So no big deal.

As long as these people get asylum and then get evaluated before getting citizenship and there is a limited number of citizenships available over a given period of time everything might yet work out fine.

It will not work out fine just by inertia and political correctness..

I would rather have one crazy polish fascist than a thousand people claiming to be syrian refugees come to my doorstep. I could deal with maybe five at most.

I take issue with the part about birth rates and the 35-year population forecast.

Firstly, the premise that we (Germany) need to stabilise our population level stems primarily from the depopulation of parts of the country, the north-east most of all. However, the cause is not low birth rates. It's urbanisation, which is part and parcel of capitalism. Everything gravitates towards the centres while the rest becomes hinterland to be exploited for resources.

Secondly, population forecasts turn into horseshit real fast. If we were to look at a 35-year forecast created in 1980, we'd miss the reunification, the breakup of Yugoslavia by NATO, about a dozen wars in the Middle East and the destabilisation/desolation in large parts of Southern Europe. Nevermind the EU with all its freedom of movement agreements that were recently suspended.

If we had made a 35-year forecast in 1910... well, you get my point.

Thirdly, Europe is not a singular unity. Our ongoing assault on the economies of Southern Europe (aka austerity) lead to a mass exodus already, Same for the Baltic countries. Unfortunatly, those countries who lost a significant portion of their young and educated over the last years are also the countries who are least equipped to deal with mass immigration in an orderly fashion.

Which brings me to my fourth point: many folks make the argument that we cannot possibly pay for the integration of 800k refugees, much less for 400k a year. Well, we payed for reunification in the most inefficient, corruption-inducing and anti-social way imaginable by piling the cost exclusively on our version of social security. And you know what? It still fucking worked. If Germany can shoulder the cost of reunification, the EU can pay for 2-3 million refugees. End of story.

Finally, we need immigration. Not to maintain population levels, not to even out low birth rates. We need it to not become too homogenous, especially Germany. Too much consensus, too much group think, not enough confrontation and cultural diversity. Shake things up before people start believing their own bullshit again about their own superiority. We've seen it already vis-a-vis Greece.

@eric3579

Does the Polish Six Flags guy look familiar? It's the very same racist imbecile who described the plan to create a unified driver's license across Europe as "Ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Ticket" while doing the Nazi salute.

I'd rather have a thousand Syrian refugees than people like him.

Thank you for re-upgrading for another year!

You're new chartership is all waxed up, polished off, and waiting for you to take it for a spin!

I think he's wearing Tevas, quite acceptable footwear...
The nail polish?
well, your guess is as good as mine.
I think it clashes with the color of the river.

Is that blue nail-polish on his toes? Or is there something I don't know about rescue workers in sandals?

You can't really be that dense, can you?
Flying the battle flag represents love and support of the 'confederacy' and what it stood for, which was clearly based on racist dehumanization of millions of people (just read what the confederacy's founders said at the time, it's clear). You can ignore that it's a symbol of racial hatred, you can listen to those that claim it's about 'heritage', but you must consciously ignore that the heritage it represents is one of complete subjugation of a people based on the amount of melanin in their skin, and a clearly stated superiority of those with less melanin. That IS the history of the flag, it is not, and never was about any other part of Southern culture.
Your mistaken feelings about this flag indicate that you think Germany should still fly the swastika, just below the current German flag? It's pretty much the same thing, and the same level of insult to the victims of the confederacy as the swastika would be to Jews/Polish/French/Belgians/etc.

This is all fine and dandy, and kudos to people who take time to help others, but in my experiences......cops can still go fuck themselves. Not to worry though lantern53, I've never dealt with you in uniform, as far as I know. I bet you're the bee's knees. I can't judge you there. Maybe I'll even polish up your badge for ya one day. Press your uniform. Tune up the ol' squad car. I just hope someone makes a video of it, and it's posted here. So we can all hold hands and sing kumbaya, while the siftbot joyfully sheds a single unifying tear.

Your video, Steam controller looking polished, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Probably mylar'd lexan or polished #8 stainless steel.

Guys, this ain't so hard...
You're a racist when you assign more or less value as a human being to people of a certain race (ethnical group) than you assign to yourself because of their ethnicity. There's a difference between saying "Stalin is less worth than M.L. King" (personal opinion) and "white people are worth less than blacks". The latter would be racism.
Prejudice is when you have opinions about people before knowing the facts about them.
Walking up to Mike Tyson and saying "You must have a giant cock because all black men are giants" is a prejudice that may be racist but it assigns positive values. Sure, it's offensive, like telling asian people they must be great at math, but somewhat forgivable. You're an ignorant cunt, yeah, but at least you said something flattering. You racist.
Walking up to Mike and telling him "All black men are criminals" is not only prejudice but also racist. Why? Because calling somebody a criminal is a negative judgement. A generalized negative prejudice towards an ethnic group is a racist way of thinking. Mike was convicted for raping his girlfriend. He is a criminal. Not all black men are Tyson. And if they were, I'd prefer the science variant. You're plain wrong.
Now saying "I bet all black people like listening to R'nB music" is just prejudice. There's no judgement here. Right? Unless you consider "he listens to R'n'B" an insult. How about "all polish people love ice cream"? Did you just imply polish people are all fat?
The difference between prejudice and racist prejudice lies entirely in subtext and context. It's not what you say, it's what you mean.
Prejudice is a tightrope made of blurry lines spanning over a pit of outrage. That's why politicians should not walk that way.
Being aware of differences between race, ethnic groups and talking about is simply being hones and probably not giving a shit about political correctness. We ARE different. That's the interesting part.
What we sadly forget is this: to focus on what we have in common. But somebody already said that way more eloquent than I ever could:
"Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with
the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject
to the same diseases, healed by the same means,
warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer
as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?
If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us,
do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?
If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that.

Here is list of reasons that have me excited for this game when I originally did not give two shits because the two that came before it I did not enjoy. On the killed dupe I mentioned that there are no load screens, this is huge!

Second, it's supposedly the most detailed and largest open-world created, bigger than Skyrim. And then remember that in Skyrim, there were load screens when entering buildings... in Witcher 3 there won't be load screens, it's all fluid.

Third, in all of the reviews people say that your choices actually do change the game world.

Fourth, NPCs have day/night scripts that make sense and make them believable.

Fifth, the atmosphere - trees bend as you hear the wind come in. That's the sort of attention to world building this Polish developer has brought us.

Sixth, every encounter of the supposed 200+ hour gameplay is voice acted/cinematic, the voice acting is supposed to be great as well I've heard the quests themselves are a lot of fun.

It's more like mixing diamond dust into a polishing compound.

There's a Polish joke in here somewhere

He might THINK he's won...

...until the next day he wakes up from his nap on the couch, looks in the mirror and sees the Magic Marker mascara and crimson toenail polish lipstick.