The idea of immigrants being accepted to prop up an ageing population is not sustainable long term as those immigrants...

The idea of immigrants being accepted to prop up an ageing population is not sustainable long term as those immigrants will also age, needing an even larger influx of immigrants to support the first wave of now old-aged immigrants. This process can only continue until the immigrant supply has been exhausted upon which point the system itself will fail ideologically. This is not sustainable.

What other specific immigration models could also solve some of the current arguments (usually around labour forces) that mass-immigration has solved? While also not introducing a lot of the negatives such policy has introduced.

Is there a utopian immigration policy that can balance both The West's need for labour and also strength Western civilisation?

>we wuz foodies n space

>illegal immigrants
>work and support
Weak shitpost

>mass-immigration has solved

At least try to comprehend the question mate. Fuck.

>The West's need for labour
Enough with this shitty meme

Man there are a lot of Asian and Middle Eastern carers looking after Australia's ageing white population. We have an ever-widening gap between people's expectations about life and reality. Well educated Western populations do NOT want to clean up shit and piss and clean the streets. There is an expectation that these things just ARE. When in reality they are propped up on large immigrant labour forces. There have been times in Australia where people have to be appealed to to become skilled labour such as carpenters, plumbers, etc. They offer the apprenticeships to Australian workers and have to look to external labour markets for people willing to do skilled labour trades as well.

>The idea of immigrants being accepted to prop up an ageing population is not sustainable long term as those immigrants will also age, needing an even larger influx of immigrants to support the first wave of now old-aged immigrants. This process can only continue until the immigrant supply has been exhausted upon which point the system itself will fail ideologically. This is not sustainable.

Even better, remind yourself that 3rd world countries who provide mass migrants cannot be permitted to grow or improve anything, or else their people would stay home and not move.

So, perpetual war, starvation and unrest to keep 1st countries rolling in money for the few, while the 3rd world will continue to produce millions of dead for a few migrants.

So you see the REAL racists and 1%ers are the 'bleeding heart' lefty faggots.

...

This data doesn't refute any of the points. Please speak to me about other SYSTEMS that could actually alleviate some of the issues.

Meme-ing doesn't make it so.

So you're saying that 3rd world nations are essentially The West's slave breeding grounds?

There is no problem with our demographics. Population is not supposed to increase indefinitely (especially if your comparison is post WW2 era). And especially in times of economic downturns.

The only jobs that lacks employees are the jobs that can't outsource for structural reasons. They have to stop being greedy fucks and pay people decent wages and then young Europeans will want those jobs, end of the story.

>a utopian immigration policy
Would require some utopia to immigrate to.
>accept Zero immigrants per year
>while housing an even ammount of each major race and ethnicity to satisfy the left
>Racially divided by housing, without significant differences in initial accommodations provided
>free market with ethical restrictions
>everyone taught basic medicine in primary schools
>pharmacy in secondary
>taught how to live off the land in Jr. High
>mandatory military service to vote
>class validictorians receive a small loan of one million dollars

How exactly are third world peasants going to contribute to a first world economy?

Is there a demand for muhammad's mudhut construction ability in the outback?

What is unskilled labour like scrubbing a toilet with a brush or being the person who educated you.

For starters, we might want to consider planning for a future that doesn't rely on infinite growth and instead be comfortable with something closer to equilibrium.

>What is unskilled labour like scrubbing a toilet with a brush

How incredibly useful. That's really a skill that generates wealth, unlike engineers that only do silly things like how to make goods more efficiently.

It's unskilled labour it, by definition, does not generate wealth in and of itself but is manipulated (through hiring/firing).

A few points:
- massive % of unskilled labour forces in Western cultures are made up of immigrant workers.
- declining birth rates amongst Westerners
- ageing populations in most Western cultures

These points all contribute to a point in time where those who hold Western ideals will become a minority in their own countries. There will be a reduction in Western values and systems which will be superseded by systems designed by the now majority immigrant population.

I don't know if this, in and of itself, will be bad. I can hope for a rich multicultural melting pot with no negatives but from looking at history and current conditions I believe the reality is far from the hope.

They can scrub toilets in syria bitch

And who will scrub them in America with a culture that looks down on such jobs? If you sucked out all the immigrant labour I don't think there is a large enough labour force that is willing and able to fill the roles. It almost feels as if the whole thing is in motion and the kinetic energy behind it is unstoppable. Maybe guide-able but it cannot be stopped without radical societal change in The West.

>validictorian

>Is there a utopian immigration policy that can balance both The West's need for labour and also strength Western civilisation?
We need white people to reproduce, and insofar as we can tell, the only way to do that is religion.

Atheist here, but the facts are the facts: when people stop believing in god, they stop reproducing. Maybe it's just the fact that religious people don't believe in birth control/abortions, and the fact that they get married at higher rates as opposed to dating and casual sex their whole lives, but until we figure out ANOTHER way to get people making babies we need a massive revival of the church.

I think it was Dawkins who said that he's rethought his animosity towards Christianity because it served as a valuable bulwark against something worse: I think that's proving true.

>I don't think
>it feels

At least have some points memelord

Bump