Angered, Sweden

I wish to visit Angered, Sweden (sometimes called Angered Centrum), yes that is the name of the place:

When I entered this mysterious end station. I didn’t expect to find a shopping center that had so many Halal restaurants, Turkish delights stores and Kebab places. I love to eat Kebabs here in Norway with Halal meat, so for me its not a problem eating this. I rather found this place interesting, because it had all of the world foods in one place.

At the end of this shopping center, I found ICA store and here I found some Swedish people. But mostly everywhere I went there was foreigners…Why is Angered Centrum almost empty of Swedish people? Have the government in Sweden made this to a place so that foreigners and Swedish people should live so far apart from each other that it would reduce conflicts?

Here is more.  The Wikipedia page of Angered is unusual, it serves up tidbits such as:

The hilly terrain forced the planners to build the different parts of Angered at some distance from each other.

It turns out that Angered was modeled after Brasilia, and it was a major center for public housing investment.

The locale can be subdivided further yet:

Of those born in Hjallbo, a district of Angered, three-quarters have a foreign background. This compared with a half two decades ago and just 6.5 per cent in all of Sweden.

Added to this sense of cultural and social isolation is the suburb’s reputation for criminality and violence. Nawol and Hamdi, two Somali teenagers in hijabs, voice their concerns about living in a neighbourhood that has long been characterised as a ghetto. “I don’t like living in Angered. A lot of people do bad things,” said Nawol, 19. Hamdi added: “There are a lot of gangsters.”

There is a Swedish election on Sunday, and to counter the Sweden Democrats many of the other Swedish parties are moving to the right on immigration, the median voter theorem in slow motion, so to speak.

Exactly what kind of institutional failure is this?  Political?  Intellectual?  Democratic?  The absence of real democracy?  I should stress that I am happy to live near Somali and Yemeni women in hijab (and not) in northern Virginia, and I believe American assimilation continues to work reasonably well, including for Muslims and in fact especially for Muslims overall.  But the formula seems to work less well in Sweden, with its tighter social structures and more generous welfare benefits.  What exactly went wrong?  What is the final equilibrium?  Will anyone ever be able to say again “if only they had a Nordic-style social welfare state”?


Halal food is barbaric and cruel, for starters, should be banned. Second, WTF good is going on here, exactly? Objectively, by any sane measure, Sweden would be better off without these migrants!! Crazy!!

The Chinese also like to drain as much blood as possible from the meat. It improves the flavor, supposedly. Can't disagree about the other points. Professor Cowen posits: "The absence of real democracy? "

To answer that, assume a counterfactual anonymous referendum on immigration and refugee policies. What are the odds that the actual outcome would be equally or more welcoming? If the outcome were a similar as the actual policy, that would mean we have real democracy.

The Chinese also like their meat tough, hence why they beat and abuse the animals before slaughtering them. Frightened animals have tougher meat. In the West, farmers attempt to make the slaughter process as non stressful as possible, for the opposite effect.

'First, they came for halal food, and I said nothing because halal food is barbaric and cruel.

Second, they came for kosher food, and I said there are fine people on both sides, so good riddance.'

But to be a bit more serious, I just bought some halal dürüm flat bread at the local Edeka, which is also vegan - I'm curious what makes them 'barbaric and cruel.'

You should have ordered the Murder Falafel, obviously - or the Dahmer Kebab, it tastes like d*ck but is made in America.

Bonus trivia: Halal slaughter is performed by cutting the jugular veins, carotid arteries, and trachea of the animal and death comes from hemorrhage. However, the method preserves the spinal cord and vertebral arteries, which provide alternative blood supply to the brain. In some cases, the jugular veins clot off stopping the exit of blood from the brain, which prevents the animal from passing out for some time.

Bonus trivia: Halal slaughter and kosher slaughter are pretty much identical in practice.

That's right -- They are ancestral method to kill animals that were instituted to give the quickest possible death and the least sufferings to the animal. Now of course we have more efficients modern method, by
chloroforming the animal before.

Possibly you are right that Swedes are worse off than if they take in immigrants (not sure myself). But undoubtedly the immigrants are better off. Shouldn't their well being count for something? Or is you view that being foreigners their condition doesn't count. I must admit that this seems very callous to me, I care for people regardless of their nationality.

Call me callous, but if we are going to import un-assimilate-able sand jihadis we might as well put them inside a walled city.

Ugh. All this diversity stuff is a bummer.

If indiscriminate immigration with weak assimilation (as contra Tyler I see now in the US relative to 50 years ago) led to much lower productivity, would it be ok? Let's be blunter. Imagine that the whole world were mixed so that in equilibrium everyone lived at about a quarter the standard of living of Stockholm in 2015 but there were no places as peaceful, orderly, liberal, and well off and relatively conflict free as Stockholm or Tokyo in 2000 with little chance of a new Industrial Revolution booming, would that be OK? After all, billions would be better off. But I would posit that without the peculiar nationalisms of Europe in the 18th and 19th century, modern world prosperity would have been almost impossible for at least a millenium.

Ok plenty of hypotheticals, but this doesn't detract from my point that the welfare of the immigrants should also be considered by any person who isn't completely selfish.

And on your point that immigration inevitably lowers overall productivity, two of the cities in the world that have experienced the most immigration in recent years are New York and London, and I think they are just about the richest places in the world in terms of GDP per head. And they have had falling crime. To my eyes both of them are much more pleasant places than in the 1970's when immigration was much less. So there is no inevitable decline due to immigration.

Wealth attracts immigrants, or immigrants cause wealth?

What's the scholastic quality of immigrants to NY and London vs the scholastic quality of immigrants to Angered or Marseilles?

"the welfare of the immigrants should also be considered by any person who isn't completely selfish."

Who is this completely selfish strawman you are attacking? Are you completely selfish because you didn't spend half of your last paycheck giving to the poor? If not, then feel free to justify your actions.

The simple fact is that people get to express their preferences and that mudslinging at people with different preferences isn't going to change anyone's mind.

Mudslinging does work. That's why millionaires and billionaires dump tons of money on negative campaigning.

Even accepting your argument that immigrant welfare should be a consideration, immigration decisions are permanent and irreversible. If there is even a small chance of political dysfunction stemming from excessive or disordered immigration, that should be given very substantial weight. The entire world could very well be much worse off overall, if the most productive nations are weakened.

"Ok plenty of hypotheticals, but this doesn't detract from my point that the welfare of the immigrants should also be considered by any person who isn't completely selfish. "

Good grief, where are you coming from?

If you REALLY want to improve the welfare of the global poor, (as opposed to just bleating about it) then you should :

1) Improve governance in the developing world. Possibly by killing a few thousand African "leaders" in a demonstrative manner and auctioning their states as administrative fiefs to the Coca-Cola corporation.
2) Lower your tariffs on agriculture and other goods.
3) Drop all the biofuels and other environmental nonsense, especially about genetic modification of crops
4) Stop most of your foreign aid which enables (1)

All of these will help far more poor people than the virtue signalling of creating 1st world ghettos for them and wrecking functioning western societies.

Sure. If the government suddenly decreed that I am entitled to receive half of your paycheck every month, my well-being would improve and I'd be thrilled. How do you feel about it though?

Well it is probably not half my pay check that the government takes, but it is a big chunk already. And yes they give some of it to poor people and if you are one of them and you need it, you are welcome to it. I am not a fan of indiscriminate welfare in general as I think it creates bad incentives, but if someone needs some help generally speaking civilized rich countries find a way to give it.

ChrisA, Your problem is simply one of basic economic facts about the world.

"Help Needed" >> Discretionary Wealth of Comfy Westerners

Your plan is equivalent to having an ocean warm itself around a candle.

Lol, this guy should definitely be in charge of lifeboats and seed corn.

Swedish law does ban slaughtering animals without stunning them. Some Muslims think that is acceptable, as long as the right prayer is mumbled. It is possible that is what is meant by Halal meat in this case, otherwise they are importing the meat.

From a 2016 BBC story:
"Sweden's massive housing shortage and long waits for rent controlled apartments in the centre of town mean that many new arrivals end up here, and stay here. This includes some of the 160,000 people who sought asylum in Sweden last year."

This is the correct answer to the specific question of the ridiculous segregation. Sweden has rent control that is muche stricter than NY. This gives outsiders zero chance of getting a good apartment, even if they could potentially afford it.

Those apartments were good enough for the working class so they should be good enough for the idle class.

"But the formula seems to work less well in Sweden, with its tighter social structures and more generous welfare benefits."

Doesn't Texas also seem to assimilate Hispanics better than California --- at least in terms of employment, education, and property ownership --- even though the two have similar percentages of Hispanic population?

probably more accurate to say texas assimilated northern mexico
but people for the most part get along pretty well and the economy is
good and housing is pretty affordable
no comas los doritos anaranjados

And many Hispanics in Texas become evangelical protestants.

Being swedish maybe I can shed some light on the situation.

From the mid sixties to the mid seventies Sweden had a massive building boom, much of which was in form of rental housing far from the city centers (Angered is a suburb to Gothenburg) with planning built on separating living from commerce and industy and protecting people from traffic. The picture in this swedish WIkipage shows the principle quite well:

Needless to say this megalomanic planning wasn’t what people wanted, so anyone who can affird it rather buys a house or a flat in a co-op (which is a well functioning, although construed market for appartments in Sweden).

So the architecture separates the poorer (immigrant-dominated) parts of Swedish cities from the richer ones. Heavy building planning restrictions keeps this pattern. And then of course high entry level-pay and such things makes it harder for those who start at the bottom to better themselves.

Centrum in Angereds Centrum just means center, som it’s basically the mall or central square in Angred.

I agree with this. Rent control and restriction on building new apartments and the fact that it is basically impossible for immigrants to get jobs ok no the formal economy causes this. This is not going to change for a long time. The politicians will all but close the borders for new arrivals and in 30 years the children of these immigrants will be fairly integrated. Their parents and anyone over the age of 15 today will be a lost generation. The majority living on welfare for their entire lives.

So would Denmark's model of "flexicurity" work to better assimilate Muslim immigrants (i.e. no minimum wage)?

Great question.

Sweden's labour market is similar to Denmark's in the way that it has high taxation on labor, high levels of unionization and high entry-level wages. It is easier to fire employees in Denmark, but it is not that difficult in Sweden - especially since new-comers to the labor market are usually found in non-permanent contract employment. The main barrier as I see it are the high pay that the system (without legal minimum wage but through the generalized effect of collective bargaining agreement in each sector) imposes on potential employees with lower skills.

So I take it that Denmark's labor market isn't actually all that flexible, at least say compared to Aglophone countries.

That's the optimistic (and probably unrealistic) case.

The more likely case is Sweden gets a Darwin Award.

It may be that Sweden must die so other countries can avoid their example.

That's exactly my takeway from the article: the architectural design of those cities determined the way they evolved in the future.

And that's something you also note in other parts of Europe: Bijlmermeer in Holland, for example.

The UK has a lot of tower blocks. Some are perfectly serviceable and safe. Some are havens for violent crime and dysfunction.

The main factor determining the outcome is NOT the architecture. It is the nature and quality of the tenants. The private tower blocks are all fine. The public housing tower blocks are all rubbish.

How does this differ from Hong Kong and its massive housing estates scattered throughout the areas north of Kowloon and the island, though? Those estates are generally self-contained blocs of tiny flats, away from the more bustling urban areas, along with a drab shopping area and playground/park for families and children. Yet these housing estates don't have the same issues as these communities in Sweden (or the banlieus in France).

I wonder why immigration is sacralized---but only when PC.

Are black South Africans criticized for being xenophobic, and nativist, and possibly racist, towards their white neighbors?

Were America's Native Americans xenophobic towards Europeans? Why not embrace the diversity Europeans offered?

Moreover, there is something insulting to any group or nationality to suggest they would be "better" if only they were diversified by out-groups.

Should we say to black South Africans they only need to mix a lot more with whites to become better? Maybe we should tell Japan their culture would be improved by 40 million Nigerians. So much more colorful!

In the end I think US upper classes want cheap labor, ergo immigration is sacralized. Liberals imagine they are helping non-whites, so they like immigration to the US.

The employee class might have a different take on immigration and for non-racist or xenophobic reasons.

Personally, I like everybody.

You are spotting the big hypocrisies and inconsistencies in mainstream left political narrative.

I believe passion behind immigration is driven more by political motivations to crush domestic political rivals than for cheap labor. Most political morality is driven by selfish political motivations.

Tyler Cowen recently posted puzzlement that there wasn't more public noise + outrage about the caste system in India. The reason is that that story doesn't serve political interests of either the left or the right.

There is huge anti-white racism in South Africa, but that also doesn't serve political interests of either the left or the right. The left-wing NYT even wrote an article criticizing it, and specifically PR firm Bell Pottinger, that are stirring up racial tensions for political reasons, but that story simply doesn't serve the political interests of the left or the right, so there isn't a lot of effort in that direction. Most of the mainstream right is terrified of having even remote connections with white identity politics.

'driven more by political motivations to crush domestic political rivals than for cheap labor'

Actually, if your domestic political rivals are unions, you can do both at the same time. Which has been pretty obvious in the U.S. since the Reagan years.

'Most political morality is driven by selfish political motivations.'

Well, crushing unions has never been driven by political morality on the part of Republicans. And as for selfish political motivations - no, it tends to be pure normal selfishness on the part of those who wish to pay their workers as little as possible. There is also an ideological component, but whether that is a political motivation is a broader subject.

By this same token, Somalis are supposedly doing great in the US, not so great in Sweden, at least according to Tyler. Are we sure that this is the fault of the Swedes, not the Somalis? If so, why? 'There's more racism in Stockholm than in Virginia' is something you'd have to work to convince me of.

One of the self-destructive behavior of immigrants is to live in clusters like this. There may be barriers to rent somewhere else or simply they can't pat the rent in other place.

The nice Somali women from Northern Virginia quoted by Tyler already made the choice to integrate: living among diverse people.

Let us just say that the suburban part of Northern Virginia where Prof. Cowen lives would not really fit into a European definition of 'live among.' Of course it is possible that when he shops at Pickett/Fair City (a bizarre combination, with Pickett Shopping Center involving two strip malls separated by Pickett Rd, and something that was originally intended to be a mall behind one half of the original shopping center), he sees a variety of people.

And if one was even more familiar with the general region, it is easy to map out where different groups of people live - partially because rental units tend to be concentrated in a few areas. Whether near Fairfax Circle or along Jermantown Road, driving just a quarter of a mile reveals two very different styles of living between spread out suburban tract homes and the apartment complexes.

And I should have added that different parts of Fairfax are fairly distinct, as can be seen using this Fairfax County link - What that link will not do a good job illustrating is just how distinct individual neighborhoods (or better said, individual housing developments) are compared to a larger picture combining them.

Fairfax is also a bit complicated due to the fact that DC has a significant number of people who are not American, but whose jobs involve working with various international institutions/foreign governments. (And from a slightly more historical perspective, the number of Americans who married a non-American while on government service overseas - one assumes that this effect has been declining since the end of the Cold War.)

Nonetheless, the demographics of a place like Rutherford or Somerset/Olde Creek are very distinct compared to a townhouse complex, like the one right across 236 from Woodson high school.

Even when they can live anywhere, or perhaps especially - immigrants in Houston have been known to cluster. This is an example of a house on a street consisting mostly of (fairly wealthy?) immigrants in a Houston suburb:

If you have 17,602 sq. ft. in which to roam - or fill with relatives - perhaps there is less need to assimilate beyond the assimilating you already did by successfully owning, say, gas stations or fast food franchises.

It almost seems like they're trying to recreate something.

Does Sweden not permit this sort of thing?



I believe American assimilation continues to work reasonably well, including for Muslims and in fact especially for Muslims overall.

Do Americans actually expect immigrants to immediately rush off to Gap or Ralph Lauren for their clothing, begin living off of pizza and hamburgers and lining up to buy the latest Prius? Simply living in the US will inevitably lead to some form of acculturation, although its products won't be identical to the Americans originally encountered or the immigrants that arrived. Exposure to ubiquitous television will do most of the work, changing the immigrants into American consumer nitwits. As in all things, the current crop of Americans expects things to happen immediately. Their temporal frame of reference has shrunken to match the sequence of television programming.

I've seen women in hibab and designer jeans, so I guess that part has already happened. At Universal Studios Halloween Horror Night, so wrap your head around that cultural integration.

I always assume that those women are the kids of immigrants, not immigrants themselves, but maybe I am mistaken. In any event, the US tends to get Muslim immigrants who are well educated and, for lack of a better word, more modern in their outlook. That, the US gets a far higher share of Muslims who could have stayed in their home country and had a middle class life there, but preferred to come to the US, so they tend not to be all that temperamentally conservative.

The other day I saw a couple of young Arab looking girls with heal scarfs on wearing tight leggings.

For God’s sake, Sweden is a small country with a homogeneous population speaking a fairly obscure language, and have traditionally been inhospitable to outsiders. Even Swedes in Minnesota and Wisconsin are remarkably unfriendly. The institutional failure is the stubborn unwillingness of elites to recognise that most humans place a high value on tribal loyalties.

Oh, come now. Any time Tyler's worldview is proven false in reality, something is WRONG. He demands an explanation! Where is the institutional FAILURE?!?!? Who can he blame???

Certainly not the people firebombing buildings in Malmo. But WHO??

You seem frazzled. Is everything ok?

"It turns out that Angered was modeled after Brasilia."

That explains why it has degenerated into a favela.

Interesting that Brasilia did not degenerated into a favela... neither as Angered.

Only if you ignore the article stating that it is a ghetto.

And anything influenced by Brazil will invariably degenerate.

Not true. Brazil influenced music (the first Walkman-like device aas invented in Brazil), telephony (Brazil invented a special payphone), aeroindustry (Brazil invented airplanes), literature (Brazil invented the typewriter), WW II (famous American statesman Dean Acheson praised Brazil for its cooperation the war effort against Nazism), physics (Brazil discovered the pion particle) and astrophyisics (the famous Urca Effect was discovered in Brazil).

Yet, Brasília is onde of the most beloved cities in the world. The presidencial Palaces are among the gema of world architecture

I have to say, I am a bit curious about how Tyler stumbled onto an obscure blog written in atrocious English by some life-style promoter called "Michal". Just a random Google search?

The curious fact in this article is a pattern I notice: usually large scale modernistic planned neighborhoods/cities tend to turn into ghettos.
The trouble with those neighborhoods is that they are very unappealing to regular, "white", middle classes (to whom they were originally intended). So those end up being occupied by the poor: immigrants.

This causes a de facto segregation that only makes it even more difficult the integration of immigrants and making them more suspicious for the pearl grabbing white citizen.

Another good example is Bijlmermeer in Holland, Wikipedia page below:

'usually large scale modernistic planned neighborhoods/cities tend to turn into ghettos'

Makes one wonder how the edge city of Tysons managed to avoid that fate. A possible explanation being that the planners were only interested in one thing, that being their own profit.

Well there may be a question here of the kind of modernistic design we are talking about.

US Edge cities consist of a mix of commerce, housing and work areas while the design of Angered and Bijlmermeer contemplated separation of those 3 functions. That made them unappealing for middle classes.

Yes, I agree with you that there are different kinds of modernistic designs although the point I make that urban planning impacts truly how communities integrate.

There is no question that urban planning plays a major role in how a community functions. Major East German Plattenbau complexes are pretty much gone at this point, and not only because of their inferior build quality.

European politicians should be trialed for treacherously giving away the country to foreigners. Such a disaster they have been for citizens

Yes, there is no question that Poland or the Czech Republic or Spain or the Netherlands or France (to use a local example) should have forbidden Germans from ever buying property in their countries.

Oh wait, you didn't mean that, did you? Maybe you were unaware of the complaints in several countries in the past about how what the Germans were unable to accomplish through war, they were now succeeding in by using cash.

Are talking about the British "expats"* living in Portugal, Spain and Soutthern France?

*they are too posh to be called immigrants

The interesting thing is to see what happens after Brexit. The EU enforces rules about free movement rigorously - and is decidedly in favor of all EU citizens having equal rights in all parts of the EU.

What the EU is not really concerned about is a non-member of the EU expecting to be granted the rights and privileges it used to have as an EU member.

Brexit is shaping up to be a real mess at this point, and that is just one part of it. For example, currently, those expats get medical treatment through local health care providers, without any hassles. With a hard Brexit, those expats will no longer have such access. One assumes that property issues will not be so problematic. On the other hand, with the UK leaving, EU regulations concerning intra-EU bank charges (applies to all currencies used in the EU, not just the euro) will no longer apply, and it is quite possible that those expats living on a pension will find that they are now spending significant money just dealing with transferring funds.

I am not sure how it is in other countries, but France, anyone who lives legally in the country, indecently go citizenship, has access to full free health care ("Sécurité Sociale Universelle"). So if a British citizen can legally stay in France, he will still get his free health care.

Recognizing France is not Germany nor the UK, the difference is that UK citizens are entitled to truly free health care (one reason American call the NHS 'socialized medicine' -

To the best of my knowledge, you have to pay into the French system, just as you into (quite different) German system, which most definitely does not provide free health care to everyone who is a legal resident. The German system is open to anyone who is a legal resident, but it is not free the way the NHS is.

I do not know any British expats living in Spain, so asking for details is not possible, but it seems as if different EU health care systems have agreements with each other, apart from broader EU arrangements intended more for visitors, not residents.

No, you get the benefits regardless of whether you pay anything, simply for living in France "in a permanent and durable way", which means, after three months of presence. Of course, if you work in France, you pay for the system (the general system for everybody: you don't pay for yourself, you don't buy a "right" to healthcare), but again you have its benefits even if you do not work, do not look for a job, are a stranger (as long as you are legally in France) and pay nothing.

Interesting, and somewhat hard to imagine.

Definitely not the way things work in Germany, but then the German health care system is basically private. It is quite possible for someone to be self-employed, not pay for health insurance, get sick, and then have a major hospital bill (though this is seen as a problem in several ways).


UK expats in Spain (~300lk) do seem to enjoy full Spanish health benefits. I don't think there is any additional arrangements though; they just pick up a Spanish insurance / residency card or something under their EU entitlement. There's no specific UK-Spain arrangement, AFAIK.

By comparison, the UK NHS extends acute care to all EU citizens on passport presentation. For longer term care, EU citizens access the NHS by simply registering with a local GP and presenting their bona fides there.

"Somali and Yemeni women in hijab (and not) in northern Virginia" are probably quite different from Somali and Yemini women in Sweden, in terms of their own labor force participation, relative earnings, household income, and probably most acutely, their husband's labor market attachment, status, and income, relative to natives. A common language (english) versus a rare (Swedish) one makes a huge difference as well, as immigrants tend to arrive in Sweden with no ability in the local language. Large differences between the two countries in the supply of jobs which require lower levels of qualifications.

Indeed. Northern VA is one of the richest parts of the country. It’s foriegn population was well off and high IQ before moving to NOVA. The few instances of low IQ poors moving in have caused much tension (see arguements over school district lines and the poorer Latino neighborhoods).

Tyler can live in the NOVA bubble because evil racists pushed out all the bad people. He’s literally surrounded by black trash (West DC, the Maryland 95, corridor, southern VA), but do to past racist actions driving away poor minorities and expensive rents from government fueled job growth NOVA is a kind of utopia that doesn’t have to deal with the rest of the worlds problems, even if they are only an hour drive away.

There is an ample black population in NoVa. About 20% of the population of Alexandria is black. About 18% of the population of Montgomery County, Md. is black. They are wage and salary employees of the ordinary sort, and quite unremarkable.

About 1/2 of the population of the District of Columbia lives in problem neighborhoods, as does about 1/2 of the population of Prince George's County. In sum, that amounts to about 750,000 people, or maybe 1 person in 6 in the dense settlement around DC. Your public order problems are generated by a population of feral young men of modest dimensions. (They have their molls as well).

Art, why do you keep changing your handle? You're not fooling anyone.
"There is something odd going on with the ratio between boys and girls in Sweden. The latest estimates suggest there are 123 boys for every 100 girls among 16 and 17-year-olds. That's an even greater imbalance than in the same age group in China. "

It's that's the problem in Sweden, that their refugee programs took-in so many "feral young men" it make their gender imbalance worse than China. Add in the universal age crime curve for the 16-17 years old ... the voters should vote out politicians who allowed this.

Compared and contrasted the policy of Canada. There were a lot of jokes about "Gaydar" when it announced it would take in families but not unattached heterosexual men. The backlash is much more manageable.

Selling properties to foreigners is a perfectly legal activity. Allowing illegal foreigners in the country, neglecting expulsion orders, passivity enforcing the borders is completely illegal and will prove extremely harmful for europeans.

I don't understand your point*, man.

I mean, the immigrants living in Angered were legally admitted into Sweden... no part of the blog implies that those are illegal immigrants.

*or perhaps I do...

In 2015, almost a million asylum requests were denied at the EU level, and yet just a tiny percent of the decisions were enforced. That you don't understand is mainly your problem.

'and yet just a tiny percent of the decisions were enforced'

Tell that to all the deported people from a notably large bloc of denied asylum requesters in 2015 - those living in the parts of the former Yugoslavia and Albania that are not in the EU.

You have to be really careful when using 2015, as the real problem in the first half of the year were several hundred of thousand people applying for asylum in Germany from there. Laws were changed, asylum denials became basically automatic for such Albanian/former Yugoslavian citizens, and what had been a huge wave of asylum seekers shrank to a trickle.

Your comments are always so interesting. However, most of the unenforced decisions are against middle easterns and africans. IF you happen to be from East Europe, unfortunately you are quickly kicked out.

'IF you happen to be from East Europe, unfortunately you are quickly kicked out.'

Of course you are - such blatant abuse of the asylum process was fairly quickly shut down.

And unless you wish to deny the ongoing civil war in Syria, the reasons why Syrians are given the benefit of the doubt is partially because a country like Germany has zero interest in handing over Syrians that fled back to the government they were fleeing from.

You would have seen much the same thing back during the genocidal wars that accompanied the break up of Yugoslavia in the 90s in terms of sending a former Yugoslavian citizen back to the government that had been so vigorously ethnically cleansing such people from where they used to live.

LOL. It's never occurred to you that the supremely cynical Middle Eastern regimes have figured out what to do with all their surplus fighting age men?

Some of these refugees haven't even had a Red Bull in 48 hours.

'that the supremely cynical Middle Eastern regimes have figured out what to do with all their surplus fighting age men'

Traditionally, the Assad family prefers killing them, not letting them flee. Leaving aside Afghanistan and Iraq, it seems as most Middle Eastern countries have leaders seemingly unconcerned about their surplus fighting age men, as there is no appreciable surge in asylum seekers from places like Morocco or Egypt or Jordan or Iran.

Well.... the last time I heard the only country in Eastern Europe were there could be asylum seekers is Ukraine and you don't see many people fleeing the place asking for asylum in Europe.

But if you are talking about people from Romania or Bulgaria invoking political asylum then they are abusing the system. Asylum is not for them which doesn't mean they can't move to the EU under the regular immigration quotas.

You sound very ignorant also because you haven't taken a look at asylum statistics. Ukrainians are the most deported nationality in Europe.

'Ukrainians are the most deported nationality in Europe.'

Mainly due to their being in the EU illegally, abusing the no visa agreement between the EU and Ukraine (Albanians do the same thing). Undocumented immigrants are deported when caught, of course. One assumes you have no objections to this, but maybe you are actually in favor of illegal immigrants, as long as they don't claim asylum.

As for asylum statistics, the Ukrainians are pretty much a blip. Though German language text, the table detailing 2017 is quite clear. Strangely, the single largest block of Ukrainian refugees go to Russia. The second largest block goes to Israel, which has accepted none - and considering how Israel looks at things, one can safely assume that the Israel deportation rate of Ukrainians is essentially 100%.

The USA is ahead of Germany for asylum applications, with roughly equal numbers, though the rejection numbers are not comparable in terms of backlogs being included in the rejection total, but not first applications.

You sound something other than ignorant, but then, the user name is more than a bit of a tip off.

Millions of illegal immigrants live in Europe and they aren't being deported. Quite a double standard compared to the expedition dealing with Ukrainians. Now write 1000 more words saying nothing relevant.

'Millions of illegal immigrants live in Europe'

No they don't, not in 2018.

'Now write 1000 more words saying nothing relevant.'

No, I'll just highlight this Eurostat information, and let it demonstrate that it makes no difference how many words you use, as whatever you write is simply not correct - 'In 2017, almost 620 000 non-EU citizens were found to be illegally present in the EU; this was down by 37 % compared with one year before and by 71 % when compared with the unprecedented levels of 2015.


In Greece and Germany, there was a marked peak in the number of illegally present non-EU citizens in 2015. This figure peaked in Greece in 2015 at 911 470 persons, but then fell rapidly to 204 820 persons in 2016 and fell again to 68 110 persons in 2017. By contrast, the number of non-EU citizens who were found to be illegally present in Germany rose to a high of 376 435 persons in 2015, a level that was almost maintained in 2016 when there were 370 555 illegally present persons found; the latest information available for 2017 reveals that the number of such persons in Germany fell by more than half compared with 2016, down to 156 710 persons.


Albanians accounted for the highest number of non-EU citizens found to be illegally present in the EU in 2017


In 2017, Albanians (31 180) topped the list of non-EU citizens returned to a non-EU country (see Figure 5), maintaining their top position from 2016 when there had been 42 665 Albanian citizens returned from EU territories. In 2017, the next highest numbers of returns were recorded for citizens of Ukraine (25 775) and Morocco (10 190); there were no other countries for which more than 10 000 of their citizens were returned in 2017.'

That's the immigrants that are registered. Obviously you have little incentive to show up in the police station when you have entered illegally. And you still don't answer why these guys that arrive from Bangladesh, Ghana, Nigeria without any legal ground aren't being deported. And why are we expanding the asylum rights to pretty much everybody?

Once again: be careful when using the word "we" to reffer to Europeans. I am European and have nothing to do with you, capice?

Erm... Is there any evidence in the blog posts that those cases, if true, are the ones causing trouble in Angered, Sweden?

If you have some information in that regard would you be so kind as to it that with us?

"It turns out that Angered was modeled after Brasilia, and it was a major center for public housing investment."

As an old Brazilian song says, "again, Europe bows before Brazil!"

>>Exactly what kind of institutional failure is this?

Tyler, these are the same type of housing projects that in the US are mainly inhibited by minorities. Same institutional failures (or was it a "success" in the maker's eyes?) that lead to no go area projects in urban USA.

Also US immigration laws and circumstances are very different from European ones. US immigration is mainly driven by skilled people that want to get ahead in live whereas European immigration is driven by desperate people that wish to survive. Very different poppulations.

? What about unauthorized Hispanic immigrants?

Someone's gotta pick the strawberries. Economy is booming. Unemployment is low. It's not like their stealing anyone's job. And their illegal status makes it impossible to actually threaten better skilled employees.

In Europe (Germany at least) their status is legal but it's illegal for them to work (never understood why, maybe someone can shed a light).

I was merely disputing the assertion that immigration to the US is mainly driven by high skilled immigrants. That is the case in Canada, not the US, although I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the well educated proportion of US immigrants is higher than in Europe. Also, I agree with you that an immigration regime that grants temporary work visas for agricultural laborers (and one with enough slots to meet demand) is a good idea. That and E Verify. I don’t understand why opponents of immigration don’t make it a priority to punish employers, since we know from the recession that when jobs dry up for illegals, they go home.

Why would anyone ever model anything after Brasilia?

Because it is onde of the most beloved cities in the world. It is classy, the presidencial palaces are awesome. The city was scientifically planned to optimize well-being and confort.


Yes. Brasília is the first city designed in a rrional way, according to a far-seeing plan. There is good reason to believe Brasília is the future.

"What is the final equilibrium?" A jihad by The Islamic Republic of Sweden against the Kingdom of Denmark, I'd think.

This is all part of a worldwide sea change in the nature and meaning of religion.

The same bifurcation happens the world over. Moderate or successful people drift away from passionate religions. People under economic or cultural threat drift toward fundamentalism. (Trump and the evangelicals are not that different than Ahmadinejad and the imams.)

It is kind of sad that a global increase in prosperity has led to spiritual insecurity for so many, but perhaps it is just something to get through. The grandkids will be too prosperous to be tundamentalists. In the US or in Sweden.

Looking back, "kind of sad" was the wrong thing to say. When you think of the full scope of it, it is easily "tragic."

Millions of deaths because religious fundamentalists worldwide could not wrap their heads around the idea they should read more than religious texts and attend at least Junior College.

This is a fun narrative, and it just so happens to line up with your priors!

Unfortunately it’s completely factually wrong.

The most religious Sunni states happen to be among the wealthiest per capita countries in the world.

The man who gifted us the modern form of political Islam and its violent offspring was Said Qutb, not a goat herder.

His moment of epiphany was on Mt Tamelpais in the United States, where he was living on scholarship earning his masters degree. He returned to his native Egypt and spread the gospel of radical political Islamism. He’s the true father of most of the violent Islamist groups we have today.

Of course you object, the terrorist leadership may be educated, but the rank and file are drawn from the ranks of the poor and destitute!

Which is also not true. The rank and file are more likely to have a university degree (engineering usually) and come from respected middle class families than the rest of the population. Try again.

No one who lists the "per capita" wealth of quasi-feudal societies is worth responding to.

Indeed it was the expanding wealth of the Shah's Iran that created anger among the poor and and uneducated, sparking the first religious revolution of the kind.

Precisely because it was not distributed "per capita."

I guess I did explain it to you after all.

You made several claims, all of them false. Let’s take a look.

“Moderate or successful people drift away from passionate religions.”

- False. As I noted above, Islamist terrorists are predominately middle class and have a university education. They are also more likely to be married.

“People under economic or cultural threat drift toward fundamentalism.”

-False. Islamist terrorists are again predominantly middle class and educated. Most come from overwhelmingly Sunni majority countries that adhere to Islamic law. There is little to no cultural threat.

“Millions of deaths....attend at least junior college.”

-False. The rank and file are predominantly middle class and university educated. The leadership is even more educated, often spending years attaining graduate degrees in the west. Indeed, the turning point for many seems to be living in the west and becoming horrified at our supposed moral decay (even in the 50s).

You’re trying to shoe horn Trump into a discussion on a subject you apparently know nothing about.

Seems familiar.

Also describing 1970s Iran as feudal is...strange. That’s well post land reform.

Islamism seems to be caused by rage at humiliation by external historical enemies (Israel, the west), corruption in government, and the delusion that religion can reorder society to reclaim some lost prestige and power.

I believe American assimilation continues to work reasonably well

Do you notice who is the President and what issue he won with? Overall I agree that the US has better assimilation of minorities than European nations but our President called most illegal immigrants Rapist his first speech. And he won with this campaign.

Probably the main reason the US is better assimilation is because we had the Civil Right battles in the 1950s and 1960s while most European nations have had limited minorities and citizen movement.

"our President called most illegal immigrants Rapist his first speech"

As I say above, I see this coming from the same place as eastern religious condemnation of the west.

In both cases, people who feel passed-by in the great boom of globalization developed an integrated identity and religion to condemn it all.

White Christians and brown Muslims are brothers in their fears.

Precisely because we don't want to end up like the social mess that is US we would rather stay away from mixing populations.

Be careful when you use the word "we".

I am an European (Portuguese) and wouldn't mind having mixed populations and don't think the US is a social mess.

In fact I live in a country, Portugal, where "mixing populations" has been the rule for centuries. And believe me: nothing bad has happened because of all that "mixing".

By the way, what is your country? I bet you are from one those countries like Hungary or Poland where people never have never seen a single immigrant in their entire lives.

Great, you can have all our arabs.

"our President called most illegal immigrants Rapist"

This is false, right?

Amazing that on a libertarian blog we have more hysterical comments about Muslims in Sweden than the enormous amounts of socialism Scandinavia in general has.

As has been noted by others, it is hard to underplay how much this has to do with city planning and housing policies. Almost all of these suburbs (including Angered) are examples of the so-called Million Program ( being pursued in the 60s and 70s.

The separation of commercial space from living areas makes means there is little flowthrough of people on the streets which makes the areas feel less safe. The bad upkeep in recent decennia means that the areas are among the least attractive to live in, making them de-facto social housing areas.

Social housing is great. But when all the social housing is clustered in isolated garden cities and not interspersed with regular middle-class housing they become self-contained spaces of low opportunity. Add to this the rigid queue system for apartments means it might take one or two decades to get a rental contract in a more attractive neighborhood.

This is not a problem of immigrants not wanting to or not being capable of adjusting. My second-generation immigrant friends whose parents were fortunate enough to get more centrally located apartments in Stockholm are indistinguishable from other Swedes socially. Rather, it is immigrants being the victims of a series of flawed housing policy moves.

Think Edward Glaeser at Harvard would have more thoughtful things to say on this topic than anyone.

Comments for this post are closed