New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

The problem in Europe is not immigration, the problem is there being no European country with a vision of the future for immigrants to buy into.

Aesthetic Traditions ≠ Culture. Traditions are just one aspect, but as Nietzsche wrote about the death of God, traditions are not a substitute for values.

America for hundreds of years has offered a shared vision of the future and values to immigrants of every background, and within <1 generation most immigrants become fully integrated.

When European identities are all built around stories from the past, and the only vision of the future being offered is one of impending doom and urbanist intellectual memes (climate apocalypse, population decline, social welfare breakdown, economic malaise, technophobia), it's no wonder that immigrants wouldn't want to buy into your culture. I'll enjoy your aesthetic traditions and take your free social welfare, but I'll keep my own culture and values, thank you very much.

When your sales pitch is: "we don't like new things here so there's nothing to create, but life here is easy, you don't have to do much because the state will take care of you!" I don't think you're attracting the best citizens.

I agree with this. Far too many European countries have no optimistic or even productive outlooks on the future, instead seeming to trade in a form of pessimistic reductionism. Eat less, do less, be less.

However:

> it's no wonder that immigrants wouldn't want to buy into your culture

Then why do they stay as long as they can drain resources? I would never move to a country I don't respect, let alone stay to drain resources and give nothing back. That mentality is alien to me. That isn't to say every immigrant is a drain on resources, but the ones that do not buy into the culture, do not buy into the vision (or lack thereof), and do not contribute -- why are they here? Simply because despite all of that it's better than where they came from? If so, we're doing both ourselves and them a disservice by not denying them entry, because both parties end up miserable.

Hey, good for you. But there are many societies where making a living without working is something to be proud of. I know because I live in one.

That's fair and I think it's mostly true. At the same time, comparing "Europe" as a monolith compared to the US doesn't make a lot of sense, the history, languages and religions aren't shared for many countries, contrary to the US. We can circle back to saying it was and is a lack of vision from the EU to not have been more aggressive in creating this culture.

> I'll enjoy your aesthetic traditions and take your free social welfare, but I'll keep my own culture and values, thank you very much.

From what you wrote, I can somewhat understand this standpoint but this creates strong segregation between communities that aren't healthy and it sounds like a breeding ground for conflict as well.

And I personally fear where this is going. Because as much as I want to vet immigrants much more thoroughly and for a time hopefully have net-negative immigration in my country's case, I also know so many immigrants who came here to blend with our culture and are fantastic fellow countrymen. They've enriched our country and culture. When our representatives let it get as bad as it's getting, the ensuing conflict is one that I fear will end up harming indiscriminately, based on ethnicity and simple identifiable markers. All because spineless bureaucrats would rather not put their neck on the line, instead opting to let it all slide into the historically inevitable ugly conflict that seems looming.

I am actively looking into non-European destinations to emigrate to, and only ones where I feel I can be a net-positive on their culture and contribute to their economy and society. Because if my worst-case scenario for Europe comes to pass, I don't want to be here to be dragged into it. I don't want to be a contributor in that ugliness.

Likewise I never understood why we blame ourselves for a lack of effective integration when, particularly in Norway's case, we offer all the services you could want. But you have to _want_ to integrate, we can't force you. And if you don't want to, please leave.

This is one of the weirdest religions in modern Europe and I struggle to explain it. It's a performative self-loathing that accrues social capital in certain circles, with no real end goal. I want to ask these people...so once you eliminate the impact of the human species from the earth...then what? Wait for the asteroid to hit or the sun to engulf the earth, to restore it to its pre-life state?

Because the country of arrival is usually the stronger economic party. You have the capability of emigrating and integrating because you speak multiple languages, have most likely attained high education and you probably have the means to start a new life some place else. Honestly, good for you but not everyone has those benefits.

In the case of someone poorer, it might take a significant amount of resources and time they don't have, hence more of the burden being on countries integrating the immigrants. Let's also not kid ourselves, it's a trade for their labor in often bad conditions; not something from the grace of our hearts.

> But you have to _want_ to integrate, we can't force you. And if you don't want to, please leave.

This is imo a question the EU has struggled with for a long time. You'll want people to have their personal freedoms: culture, religion, language, etc. But you also want a cohesive whole where citizens can live and work together peacefully. This is a much more difficult question than "integrate or get out".

And I have every right to want you out of country and my taxes not to be wasted on the likes of you.

The more a society adopts socialist policies, the less friendly to immigration it becomes.

Both the US and most large European countries had roughly the same percentage of GDP driven by central government spending (socialism) in the 1960s...roughly 25-30%.

Socialist policies have steadily grown that percentage in both regions, with it happening more dramatically in Europe. The US is now at 35-40%, and Europe at 45-50%.

You can map the slowly rising anti-immigrant backlash in the US (and especially in Europe) to this perfectly.

I will keep it short because I value my time but here some things you might want to ponder:

- America integration doesn’t exist. The American strategy has always been leave people alone to keep living in their own culture. There is no actual American identity. The only things American have in common in the shared trauma of slavery and the civil war, and the founding myth which is why they remain so prevalent in the US modern discourse. Meanwhile, people will happily talk about "race" culture, half the country would be happy to slaughter the other half and culturally linked riots are a thing.

- Europe has a cultural entity doesn’t exist. The UK is different to France which is different to Germany or Danemark. Most of these countries immigration come from former colonies who already understand these countries social norms.

- Access to social welfare is severely limited to immigrants. Most of the system drain comes from people who were born in the country, not immigrants. Take any economic studies, you will see than immigration is a net positive in every European country. These are country where the population is aging fast. We simply need the immigrants to prop up the work force.

- Integration is a false issue. Most of the problems in France for example come from second generation immigrants who actually went through the French education system. The problem is mostly economic.

- The way Islam has been managed is an issue in itself. People deserve to be able to practice their cult freely and in good condition but most European countries have refused to take charge of the question. France for example left far too much space to extremist countries like Saudi Arabia. When most of your imams have been trained in the worst possible interpretations and mosques are financed by countries you shouldn’t want anything to do with, you have a major issue. There clearly is space for better solutions here.

- Plenty of political parties in Europe have strong visions for the future. Some of them are linked to social justice and preserving the environment, things you obviously dislike. The fact you can’t understand something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist however.

As an immigrant to USA, living here for 20 years, you're unequivocally wrong about this point. There is an American culture, and cult of "American dream". There are English as a Second Language programs, job integration programs, classes at every language of educations, rules and traditions for immigrant flow. The police, governments, and citizens of USA all know this is a country of immigrants and all have respect for immigrants, even if there is an "illegal" immigrant backlash right now. The threat of violence coming from political extremes absolutely does not represent the majority of people every day interactions.

In sum, American integration does exist, and I have first hand and second hand data to prove it. I'm not an expert on your other points, and I think you're trying to prove the sky is not blue, but genuinely, good luck.

This is obviously nonsense. "White" Americans are something like 57% of the population. The US is very mixed, and always has been.

Immigration in USA has multiple components, but it seems to be you're undervaluing the amount of opportunistic intellectual workers, who come here to participate in high level education, and entrepreneurial capitalism. But, here are the numbers across multiple sources (thx GPT):

  - High-skilled (H-1B + EB green cards + PhD retention): ~200–300k annually.
  - Low-wage (H-2A + H-2B + others): ~500k+ legally, probably >700k when including unauthorized inflows.

You can search US demographic data from a plethora of sources to see this is not true. It’s a recent development enabled by modern laws and policies.

>America integration doesn’t exist.

This premise

> The American strategy has always been leave people alone to keep living in their own culture.

Contradicts this. You can't have both of those things. you EXTRA can't have them when you further talk about American culture in the same goddamned line.

> Europe has a cultural entity doesn’t exist.

This premise

>The way Islam has been managed is an issue in itself. People deserve to be able to practice their cult freely and in good condition but most European countries have refused to take charge of the question

Contradicts this.

And to be completely honest, this ending:

>Plenty of political parties in Europe have strong visions for the future. Some of them are linked to social justice and preserving the environment, things you obviously dislike. The fact you can’t understand something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist however.

Straight up makes me think you are not serious at all and straight up trolling. But in the off chance you aren't, I mean it when I say you are the problem you want to fight against.

https://www.iowadatacenter.org/datatables/UnitedStates/usstr...

1. Take jobs an American would otherwise fill, which would not be a problem except 2. The economy disproportionately benefits the capitalist class (billionaires). Bringing over immigrants to boost the economy doesn’t help the median American, and it creates competition for natives

I’m not undervaluing it. Im saying it provides no value for the majority of Americans. And this on a purely economic axis - social and cultural angles are arguably all negative.

Most European countries can fail at the same things while not having a shared culture identity. I have pointed you towards one example.

Same about America. This is not a contradiction. America purposefully doesn’t integrate people because there is nothing to actually integrate them into. America taken as a whole is from my point of view not a nation. It is a collection of groups often with little in common forming a country but in tension about how it should work. Some subgroups in the USA could arguably be considered nations with shared identities but certainly not the federation.

I will hasard you actually are the problem.

That's a big assumption. Yeah, take out all the H1b immigrant that came to this country since 1985, what do you think the US economy looks like, filled exclusively with Americans? Where do you think US economy would be? Where do you think the Silicon Vally would be now? Do you think US and Americans would be better off? Do you think that the economic input of the immigrants is net negative?

I don't think you need to answer. I think you've already said no, these workers, and their contibutions are net negative. I just don't see how that makes any sense, given they're clearly a big part of the economy.

First, the idea there is no American integration is just funny, given millions of your countrymen moved to the US just 2-3 generations ago and yet French identity is essentially non-existent in the US.

In fact, there's more ethnically french people in America than in Canada, and yet Canada has very strong french cultural identity by comparison.

Second, I wasn't arguing against immigration and am not "far-right" (I'm absolutely pro-immigration), just explaining why Europe will never be able to do it en masse like the USA used to (they can't do it as much anymore either).

The reality: Socialist policy makes immigration an impossibility. The more socialist a country, the more aggressive its stance against immigration becomes. This is not a coincidence but a direct causal relationship.

People don't want to pay for random 2nd/3rd-world immigrants to suddenly get free healthcare, education and pension. It's that simple.

It's no secret that after America built its welfare state in the 1930s, this led to a dramatic shift to a closed immigration policy. And as the welfare state in the US has grown (from 25% of GDP in the 1950s to 35% today), the anti-immigrant sentiment just keeps rising.

European countries are no different, having grown their socialist welfare states dramatically over the past 60 years (from 25-ish% to 50% of GDP today). And thus, you get increasingly aggressive anti-immigrant backlash when times get tough.

The irony of the modern leftist is they don't understand the impossibility of their supposed beliefs. You cannot be both pro-immigration and pro-socialism. They are oil and water.

Either you believe immigration is a good force in the world, and thus want libertarian capitalist policy like the US pre-1930s. Or you want socialism, which leads to closed borders, and only pretend to like immigration to make people think you're a good person at parties.

You are talking complete nonsense.