3/4 of the Migrants in Germany will be long-term unemployed

[Aelex]

Source : http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/820 ... ela-Merkel

THREE quarters of Germany’s refugees will be long-term unemployed and claiming benefits for years, it was admitted today.
Aydan Özoğuz, commissioner for immigration, refugees and integration, told the Financial Times that only a quarter to a third of the newcomers would enter the labour market over the next five years, and “for many others we will need up to 10”.

The Institute for Employment Research (IAB) found only 45 per cent of Syrian refugees in Germany have a school-leaving certificate and 23 per cent a college degree.

Statistics from the Federal Labour Agency show the employment rate among refugees stands at just 17 per cent.

Figures show 75 per cent of German migrants face long-term unemployment
It said 484,000 of the refugees are looking for work, up from 322,000 last July — an increase of 50 per cent.

Of those, 178,500 are officially unemployed, meaning they not only have no work but are not enrolled in any training programmes or language courses — up 27 per cent on last July.

The figures will be hard to swallow for Angela Merkel as she seeks a fourth term as chancellor in elections this September.

Germany found most Syrian refugees lacked qualifications and language skills
Ms Merkel’s poll ratings plummeted in 2015 when she responded to Europe’s migrant crisis by announcing a deeply unpopular open-door policy.

It was hoped the arrival of so many working-age, highly-motivated immigrants would help end Germany’s skills shortage and solve a demographic crisis posed by its dangerously low birth rate.

Dieter Zetsche, chief executive of carmaker Daimler, said the refugees could lay the foundation for the “next German economic miracle”.

But the truth about the migrants’ lack of qualifications and language skills is now sinking in.

Ms Özoğuz told the FT: “There has been a shift in perceptions.

“Many of the first Syrian refugees to arrive in Germany were doctors and engineers, but they were succeeded by many, many more who lacked skills.”

Well, it seems that this myth that the migrants would contribute to the economy if we accepted them is officially dead now and with it the only logical reason we could have had to accept said migrants.
So, does this new information change your opinion on the migrant situation? It doesn't for me, personally, because it has hardly been a surprise but it does confirm me in my already formed opinion on the subject.

[Vassenor]

Source : http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/820 ... ela-Merkel

THREE quarters of Germany’s refugees will be long-term unemployed and claiming benefits for years, it was admitted today.
Aydan Özoğuz, commissioner for immigration, refugees and integration, told the Financial Times that only a quarter to a third of the newcomers would enter the labour market over the next five years, and “for many others we will need up to 10”.

The Institute for Employment Research (IAB) found only 45 per cent of Syrian refugees in Germany have a school-leaving certificate and 23 per cent a college degree.

Statistics from the Federal Labour Agency show the employment rate among refugees stands at just 17 per cent.

Figures show 75 per cent of German migrants face long-term unemployment
It said 484,000 of the refugees are looking for work, up from 322,000 last July — an increase of 50 per cent.

Of those, 178,500 are officially unemployed, meaning they not only have no work but are not enrolled in any training programmes or language courses — up 27 per cent on last July.

The figures will be hard to swallow for Angela Merkel as she seeks a fourth term as chancellor in elections this September.

Germany found most Syrian refugees lacked qualifications and language skills
Ms Merkel’s poll ratings plummeted in 2015 when she responded to Europe’s migrant crisis by announcing a deeply unpopular open-door policy.

It was hoped the arrival of so many working-age, highly-motivated immigrants would help end Germany’s skills shortage and solve a demographic crisis posed by its dangerously low birth rate.

Dieter Zetsche, chief executive of carmaker Daimler, said the refugees could lay the foundation for the “next German economic miracle”.

But the truth about the migrants’ lack of qualifications and language skills is now sinking in.

Ms Özoğuz told the FT: “There has been a shift in perceptions.

“Many of the first Syrian refugees to arrive in Germany were doctors and engineers, but they were succeeded by many, many more who lacked skills.”

Well, it seems that this myth that the migrants would contribute to the economy if we accepted them is officially dead now and with it the only logical reason we could have had to accept said migrants.
So, does this new information change your opinion on the migrant situation? It doesn't for me, personally, because it has hardly been a surprise but it does confirm me in my already formed opinion on the subject.

I'm confused. How does that destroy the myth?

[Socialist Tera]

It shows that there are not enough programs to help the immigrants gain the skills to be capable of work. I believe in compulsory education programs for uneducated immigrants to fit them in with national standards.

[The Alma Mater]

It shows that there are not enough programs to help the immigrants gain the skills to be capable of work.

Third and fourth generation descendants of immigrants of a similar origin as mentioned have had the exact same education as "natives". Their unemployment statistic is almost identical to this one.

[Vassenor]

It shows that there are not enough programs to help the immigrants gain the skills to be capable of work. I believe in compulsory education programs for uneducated immigrants to fit them in with national standards.

But I thought the only solution was to stop them coming in. Or at least that's the impression you get from the shoutier candidates.

[Technocratic Uganda]

that's bad wtf we need to secure them jobs

[Minoa]

The only source the OP provides is the Daily Express, which is very right-wing populist, anti-migrant and anti-refugee.

[Omnonia]

So, does this new information change your opinion on the migrant situation? It doesn't for me, personally, because it has hardly been a surprise but it does confirm me in my already formed opinion on the subject.

Doesn't for me either, though I suspect our opinions differ, a lot.

Their "economic value" is at best a peripheral argument. I'm still proud we did the ethically right thing and took them in, when other countries chickened out. If they're unable to become employed, it's the tax-payers' job to supply for them.

Investing in education and integration programs is a necessity, too.

[Chemaki]

Well, it seems that this myth that the migrants would contribute to the economy if we accepted them is officially dead now and with it the only logical reason we could have had to accept said migrants.
So, does this new information change your opinion on the migrant situation? It doesn't for me, personally, because it has hardly been a surprise but it does confirm me in my already formed opinion on the subject.

a

[Herskerstad]

Hopefully the conflict in Syria will die down soon so they can be sent back with assurances, as per the treatment of refugees stipulate.

[Aelex]

Doesn't for me either, though I suspect our opinions differ, a lot.

Their "economic value" is at best a peripheral argument. I'm still proud we did the ethically right thing and took them in, when other countries chickened out. If they're unable to become employed, it's the tax-payers' job to supply for them.

Investing in education and integration programs is a necessity, too.

"It's the tax-payers' job to supply for people who are unable to work and unwilling to integrate because it makes me feel like I'm moral".
Wew. And people wonder why populism is on the rise.

[Vassenor]

The only source the OP provides is the Daily Express, which is very right-wing populist, anti-migrant and anti-refugee.

The FT article in question.

[Omnonia]

"It's the tax-payers' job to supply for people who are unable to work and unwilling to integrate because it makes me feel like I'm moral".
Wew. And people wonder why populism is on the rise.

Sounds like I pegged your opinion correctly, alright.

[Minoa]

The only source the OP provides is the Daily Express, which is very right-wing populist, anti-migrant and anti-refugee.

The FT article in question.

At least a majority of the refugees and migrants are trying. For the record, I know the Daily Express for stereotyping them all as “freeloaders” (aka “all X are Y”).

[Randsbeik]

I mean, it wouldn't be an issue if the migrants weren't being paid for with welfare monies.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Goodness, it's almost like they're refugees seeking safety from a conflict rather than economic migrants coming to make up a skills shortage.

[Vassenor]

Goodness, it's almost like they're refugees seeking safety from a conflict rather than economic migrants coming to make up a skills shortage.

You have to remember that according to some people they're only refugees if they stop in the first safe country they come to. After that they're economic migrants coming to steal all the jobs and welfare.

[Aelex]

Goodness, it's almost like they're refugees seeking safety from a conflict rather than economic migrants coming to make up a skills shortage.

They stop being refugees the moment they bypass the neighboring countries offering them asylum and rather chose to go through half a continent just to get to the countries that can give them more of that sweet, sweet welfare.

[Saiwania]

These people are the biggest Trojan horse ever and it is a real shame that Angela Merkel won't ever get punished for importing ruin into Germany.

[Socialist Tera]

It shows that there are not enough programs to help the immigrants gain the skills to be capable of work.

Third and fourth generation descendants of immigrants of a similar origin as mentioned have had the exact same education as "natives". Their unemployment statistic is almost identical to this one.

The stigma surrounding the immigrants may be causing issues in finding employment.

[The Alma Mater]

Third and fourth generation descendants of immigrants of a similar origin as mentioned have had the exact same education as "natives". Their unemployment statistic is almost identical to this one.

The stigma surrounding the immigrants may be causing issues in finding employment.

Perhaps. Then again, some do manage to make a career for themselves. Some even were able to become a respected mayor of a big city.
So perhaps something else is holding most of them back. Something within themselves.

[Uxupox]

Third and fourth generation descendants of immigrants of a similar origin as mentioned have had the exact same education as "natives". Their unemployment statistic is almost identical to this one.

The stigma surrounding the immigrants may be causing issues in finding employment.

Doubtful.

[Socialist Tera]

The stigma surrounding the immigrants may be causing issues in finding employment.

Perhaps. Then again, some do manage to make a career for themselves. Some even were able to become a respected mayor of a big city.
So perhaps something else is holding most of them back. Something within themselves.

There will have to be studies on the causes of long term unemployment in those various groups.

[Forsher]

Well, it seems that this myth that the migrants would contribute to the economy if we accepted them is officially dead now and with it the only logical reason we could have had to accept said migrants.
So, does this new information change your opinion on the migrant situation? It doesn't for me, personally, because it has hardly been a surprise but it does confirm me in my already formed opinion on the subject.

There are two separate issues here. One: is the stuff you've quoted true. Two: is your interpretation valid. Let's ignore One because, hey, I'm willing to believe you. Trouble is, Two does not follow from One... at all.

"contribute to the economy" : this doesn't mean "has a job". Shockingly, expenditure matters. There's also the demographic matter... even if they aren't necessarily working themselves, and notice it's an education question, their children can't be expected to be the same (a big deal in the context of an ageing Germany). That they are under-educated is also important, because it means that they can be educated some more (this involves jobs).

"only logical reason" : do you know what sanity purchasing is? It sounds completely illogical to spend money buying stuff you don't actually need, right? But it turns out psychological turmoil really is not good for people. So even if one accepts your above point (and one should not), you have failed to substantiate the burden of your argument.

It shows that there are not enough programs to help the immigrants gain the skills to be capable of work. I believe in compulsory education programs for uneducated immigrants to fit them in with national standards.

Oh, and we're not talking about immigrants as such... but refugees. The thread title needs to be changed.

They want this.
A larger labour force, with more people scrambling for jobs, means that wages can be driven down because people are willing to work for less. It's disgusting and it's not fair on working-class people who have to put food on the table, but it's standard neoliberal economic practice in the west nowadays.

Restricting labour mobility is the very opposite of "anti working class". Immigration is really just the general case of "if you work for us, we'll give you a house".

In particular, in the context of an ageing population, people exit the labour force because they want to retire or are just too old to work. These people need to be sustained somehow so new labour force participants have to come in to replace them*. If you just allow the population to age without doing anything, then we start to talk about demographic crises... and one starts to have to choose between pensions and the dole. Here's a nasty (un) surprise: the dole will get cut first (no politicians wants to be the person who killed your granny).

Also, why the hell do people start wanting less money? Have you ever met someone who has to work several jobs to get by? In times of complete desperation, perhaps, people would start to accept less money but what people traditionally do is apply for a bunch of jobs... and typically these are minimum wage anyway but let's ignore that... and the alternatives that one tries to undercut would all be hoping for a job elsewhere (and know the firm always use to pay X) so... Undercutting is a rather rational response, but people are greedy and optimistic. Perhaps this is why we talk about sticky wages.

We must also mention that labour market demand is derived... it's based on the demand for whatever the labour does... which generally increases if you add more consumers.

*Assuming unemployment is at its natural rate.

[The Alma Mater]

Oh, and we're not talking about immigrants as such... but refugees. The thread title needs to be changed.

Considering their situation back home will almost certainly see insignificant improvement to validate sending them back for the next few decades it is very silly to assume they are not there to stay. Which works both ways ofc - you cannot put them in tents on a field all that time either.