MagicManICT wrote:That's not what he said. He said "majority," which means greater than 50%. That could probably hold as an altruism for any migrant population. One of the biggest reasons for immigration is to find work, and the lion's share of those are poor people with no hopes (lost hopes, at least) of finding work where they came from.
I'll take you're guys' word on these things, as I don't even know where to begin to dispute either one. That number wouldn't surprise me in a city/metro area like Los Angeles, though, but the population is much, much higher.
Because more rioting is going to solve the problem, right? More like we should be after our governmental representatives to make laws all can stand beside. If only we could gather even 100 people and get them to all agree on something, though....
And who's moral compass is all ***** up? Those wanting to control what others think and do or the person that wants to do what they will? The Wiccans have a philosophy, "Do what you will, but bring no harm to others." (I think I got that right. Someone please correct me if I'm misquoting it.) It's pretty much the same as "The Golden Rule," but has a bit more panache.
I'll take these in turn.
Germany does not have "non-citizens" - from what he wrote I was only able to deduce that he maybe meant foreign nationals (ie not Germans). Whilst this number is certainly possible for Munich, its still not a story of poverty and deprivation. It is a rich city with almost full employment, beyond for those that are generally not able/willing. Germany still very much maintains a strong social benefits programme, so no one is penniless - the "bottom quintile" is still rich compared to say the UK. This is not a semantics debate here, he is simply wrong on this point. Paint a picture of immigrant populations all you want with most cities, but what he's trying to paint for Munich is plain wrong. There is a significant "asylbewerber" (asylum seeker) population in Bavaria, but they are very tightly controlled and policed and rarely disappear (unlike for instance in the UK), but I'd be surprised if that was as much as 300k for the whole state. They are also not "part of the system" as such and would not count towards population statistics for example. The primary draw of Munich is to get more, not to escape having nothing - this means there are many eastern Europeans there for example, but they are nearly all very productive and hard working members of society, who would certainly get a job in their countries, just not for the same wages.
I found this for Munich:
Population As of 31 December 2005
Legitimate Population 1,436,725
Inhabitants with principal residence 1,288,307
Inhabitants with secondary residence 148,418
Germans with principal residence 988,178
Foreigners with principal residence 300,129
Foreigner proportion in % 23.3
You can trust me when I tell you the "illegitimate" population in Munich is likely countable on one hand - this is not Houston or LA. Bavaria does not mess about when it comes to registrations and statistics and policing both. Scanning through that, "Foreigner" population is indeed 300k, so that confirms my earlier suspicions. I was one of that 300k, so I know what I'm talking about here.
Maybe what I wrote in the last paragraph was misleading and a poor choice of words - I was not suggesting that more rioting was the right idea, I was merely saying that if you have to demonstrate, at least do so for a cause that has some sort of basis in fact. A black youth was killed yes, but it is extremely doubtful any relating punishment was waived because he was black. That's a point for debate. It is however irrefutable that thousands of policeman/women (of all races and colours) are shot at and some killed each year by criminal scum and I'd love to see people on the street protesting that for a change.
As to whose moral compass is ***** up ? Clearly the man who thinks that the police are out to "control what he thinks and does", rather than actually just stopping him from looting another shop - because as he puts it, he is just "doing what he wants". Civic engagement is very much a moral obligation and whilst I like your quote of the golden rule, I'm not sure it was ever meant to be interpreted by stoneheads and anarchists (not that I am suggesting you are one). The point of it in essence is to live your life well and in accommodation with others - basically to get along using all your skills (like empathy, sympathy, etc). I know society is flawed, but the basic concept is okay - we work together to achieve harmony. Strikes me in the context of that, that we spend so much time worrying about what's wrong with society that we forget to look to see what's right with it. I'll also reiterate another point - we need to stop undermining our police and military personnel. I for one do not want to live in a world (especially this one) where there is neither. Before you all start throwing mud at me though, I would clarify that I personally respect anyone that is willing to stand up and defend me and my way of life, regardless of whether they know me or not. I'm not condoning wars, or police brutality or anything like that - those are entirely different debates.
