To think Europen governments need to respond to immigration?

[Finlesswonder]

So the Netherlands is going to have a far right government.
Sweden has moved to the right.
Finland has shut its borders.
Countries that have traditionally been liberal are hardening and irrespective of the many issues listed its to do with immigration.

Ireland has seen violent protests last night following a series of stabbings.
In the UK we obviously had Brexit.

I think governments need to start responding to voters feelings on immigration as if they don't we will continue to see a general slide to the right in Europe, when actually these countries aren't right wing: it feels like a single issue is distorting the entire political landscape?

@Finlesswonder maybe you are right but the oddities of the leasehold system are off-putting to a great many people in the UK. And while I would love a convenient two-bed, two-bath apartment in a naice town centre, with central rubbish chutes, a big balcony and secure underground parking especially if it was high up with a 24 hour concierge (like my sister had in Dubai) I would put money on the reality turning out to be the usual cheapskate developer shite everywhere outside very central London.

Something like this in Milan would be awesome...
https://www.euronews.com/embed/1702696

Yeah leaahold is very weird. It's basically pre paying rent because it is NOT yours

Actually plenty of European countries live in houses as well, it's much the same as here where flats and denser dwelling options are more prevalent in urban areas, and houses in less built up areas.
Apparently it's only us Brits and the Dutch who like a terrace though:

https://landgeist.com/2023/07/01/most-common-type-of-home-in-europe/

@SomeCatFromJapan
That's a bit skewed though, because France for example would have a much bigger rural (so houses) population compared to the UK.
But go to many continental cities and compare and contrast with a UK city, and its clear that we in the UK unfortunately based our system on terraced housing as opposed to big (historical, beautiful, therefore aspirational) apartment blocks. It means that in the UK we are forced to always be building out rather than up, unless we're okay with razing loads of victorian/Georgian terraced housing (which obviously we arent)

@Finlesswonder actually yes that is a good point, a lot of the UK terraces are in the denser areas where in another country flats would be built instead.
Not very space efficient.

Maybe some would prefer apartments but I would choose London in a house still

Possibly, some of this is because the UK and the Netherlands are the most densely populated countries in Europe. It was easy to build terraced housing, because both countries are fairly flat so there have never been huge geological barriers. Where there are mountain ranges or fast-flowing deep fjords to separate villages, then towns seem to grow higher. There is an interesting book (by somebody Robb IIRC) that analyses why France's regions were so different until the advent of rail and civil engineering skills.

I notice it particularly in Spain. The first time I went in 1990-ish, by the then new Brittany Ferry route, it took six hours to drive from Santander to Aquitaine. Last year, a very similar trip took two hours. Likewise in 1993, our road trip around the Picos was all on B roads and took days. This year it was four hours because the big deep rivers now have huge viaducts spanning them.

@Papyrophile interesting points. Andorra is a really good illustration of that, all the inhabited parts are in the valleys and they seem to build up about 6 storeys fairly consistently.

That's what I love about travel in those regions of Spain, time permitting. If you ignore the new roads you can make journeys last a really long time. It makes the country feel vast.

The economic migrants sweeping into Western Europe are all strong, fighting age alpha males who were able to raise the considerable funds to pay the people traffickers.
People have no objection to helping vulnerable women and children but this is a survival of the fittest scenario.
Governments are encouraging this appalling trade as it inflates GDP and keeps wages low.

I agree, refugees (which asylum seekers purport to be) have always included the less able, the children, the old.

Get people here back into work, improve wages and training opportunities. Build more social housing, with some preference for people who have to move to find work. Educate children on the benefits of being employed. Offer incentives to older people to downsize, especially those whose rents are covered by benefits. (The so called ‘bedroom tax’ doesn’t apply to those over state pension age.)

These young immigrants may be beneficial to the economy short term, but they will have relatives they will want to bring here, which will add to pressures on housing, on schools and all public services.

What a huge, factually untrue, generalisation you have made there.

Two thirds are males aged 18 to 49. And you can't possibly tell if they were "alpha". Wtf does that even mean anyway?

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-march-2023/how-many-people-do-we-grant-protection-to#:~:text=2.2%20Age%20and%20sex%20of,(see%20table%201%20below).

you can't possibly tell if they were "alpha". Wtf does that even mean anyway?

it's a comment that arises out of pervasive MNer misandry. <shrug>
All men are abusers
All men want to dominate
All men are terrible

etc. If you go with those ideas, then defacto, all men are default horrilbe domineering abusive bullies. There is no other way for an adult human male to ever be, anyway.

Story about One of those terrible people.