Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by Guest » Mon Jun 24, 2024 10:57 pm

guest wrote:
Thu May 23, 2024 7:30 am
Western Europe, North America, and Australia have already rendered themselves giant no-go zones. And it was all entirely unnecessary.
England and Wales are no 3rd world. It's shocking stuff to see. Leave London, it's borderline b
Bronze age.

If you want to know what a country looks like after a collapse, visit England....

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by Samsung phone » Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:05 pm

I still think militarized Japan and South Korea are good options.

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by guest » Thu May 23, 2024 7:30 am

Western Europe, North America, and Australia have already rendered themselves giant no-go zones. And it was all entirely unnecessary.

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by Guest » Wed May 22, 2024 8:15 pm

This is unsustainable.
Nearly two-thirds of German residents receiving unemployment benefits have a migration background, new figures from the Federal Employment Agency have revealed.

The statistics published by the federal agency and cited by the Die Welt broadsheet showed that 63.1 percent of those in receipt of the so-called citizen’s income, or “Bürgergeld,” are of migrant origin, and “most do not have a German passport.”

The German newspaper explained that while employment figures are increasing year-over-year, “because the Federal Republic has long allowed very high immigration of low-skilled people, the number of migrants who are unemployed and receiving social benefits is also increasing.”

The figures define “migration background” as anyone who themselves or whose parents were born without German citizenship, i.e., first- and second-generation migrants.

Of the 3.93 million people eligible for the taxpayer-funded benefit as of December 2023, some 2.48 million were classed as being of a migration background, with 1.83 million recipients not having German citizenship.

The percentage varies considerably among the federal states. In Hesse, Baden-Württemberg, and Hamburg, more than 7 in 10 of all recipients are migrants at 76.4 percent, 74.1 percent, and 72.8 percent, respectively.

There exists a strong correlation between the rise in the migrant population and the percentage of welfare benefits going to migrants, giving weight to the argument that mass immigration of low-skilled workers is not a net benefit to Europe’s largest economy.

In 2013, the percentage of the German population with a migration background was 20 percent, with 43 percent of benefit recipients being migrants. Today, 29 percent of the German population are foreign-born and 63 percent of unemployment benefits are handed to migrants.

In July last year, a response by Parliamentary State Secretary at the Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs Anette Kramme to a request made by the Alternative for Germany MP René Springer revealed that the number of German recipients of welfare benefits had halved since 2010, while the number of foreign nationals receiving payments had doubled.

The cost to the taxpayer has skyrocketed since 2010, with a 122 percent increase on the €6.9 billion bill then to around €15.4 billion a year today.

Springer said at the time that Germany desperately needed to implement “a restrictive immigration policy that effectively prevents immigration into our social systems. The citizens’ income introduced by the federal government, on the other hand, acts like an immigration magnet.”

https://rmx.news/article/two-thirds-of- ... ince-2010/

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by Another guest » Thu Mar 09, 2023 11:59 pm

London Guest wrote:
Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:05 am
Speaking to my 93 year old friend in London today and she told me that she feels afraid constantly now. The hotels near her are all full of immigrants and she dare not venture out anymore. When I think of all the trials and tribulations she has come through it just seems really sad for her to end up here. She is a tough cookie like many of her generation but she no longer recognises the place she grew up in. I suppose she will not be around for much longer...maybe that's a blessing....
I wish I were 93...

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by London Guest » Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:05 am

Speaking to my 93 year old friend in London today and she told me that she feels afraid constantly now. The hotels near her are all full of immigrants and she dare not venture out anymore. When I think of all the trials and tribulations she has come through it just seems really sad for her to end up here. She is a tough cookie like many of her generation but she no longer recognises the place she grew up in. I suppose she will not be around for much longer...maybe that's a blessing....

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by Guest » Fri Dec 09, 2022 8:07 am

Guest wrote:
Mon Sep 20, 2021 11:20 pm
Climate change and mass immigration have already wrecked Australia. A lot of people flee the UK and America to escape 3rd world migrants and find Sudanese moving in next door and causing all kinds of havoc. The British ex-pats can't sell their house because no one wants to live there anymore. I have seen it with own eyes.

The Chinese will clear out everyone in short order. You can bet your life on that. Australia will become a Martian colony with only miners and robots mining ore.

Australians are also the most obnoxious and ignorant people I have ever met. I won't miss them.
Australia is a mess too. I had hoped to escape there one. That's what my father did. No there are Rhodesia too.

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by Guest » Mon Sep 20, 2021 11:20 pm

Climate change and mass immigration have already wrecked Australia. A lot of people flee the UK and America to escape 3rd world migrants and find Sudanese moving in next door and causing all kinds of havoc. The British ex-pats can't sell their house because no one wants to live there anymore. I have seen it with own eyes.

The Chinese will clear out everyone in short order. You can bet your life on that. Australia will become a Martian colony with only miners and robots mining ore.

Australians are also the most obnoxious and ignorant people I have ever met. I won't miss them.

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by Guest » Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:19 am

I guess Australia and New Zealand are not good choices. China is going to taker them.

NZ should be kicked out of the five Is.

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

by FullMoon » Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:19 pm

Navigator wrote:
Fri Aug 27, 2021 8:33 pm
FullMoon wrote:
Tue Aug 24, 2021 2:16 pm
What potentially would be the difficulties coming from the loonies? But really, it's two states and each area will be governed by local govt soon I believe. I'm already seeing it occuring as the insanity intensifies.
The states could assess taxes differently. They could also look at asset seizure differently. For those reasons, best to be governed by Boise and not by Olympia.
Very good points, thank you.

Top