@Zervo
/* "Whether Czech have more room and resources or not can only be assessed via ecological footprint analysis."
Are we seriously going to start to care about that only because people with brown skin "invades"? */
Absolutely, because that is the only way to avoid collapse.
"Seriously though, have you ever heard of the word import?"
That is part of the ecological footprint analysis.
"Again, are we seriously going to start giving a crap because Europe might have their population increased by a single procentual unit."
There is a fundamental disagreement that you don't seem to grasp.
All the talk about how Europe is becoming old and should have higher birth rates and/or more immigrants to increase its population are all to support the financial BAU (business as usual) Ponzi scheme(s). So the BAU demand more consumption, thus also more waste and more emissions. While the ecological footprint analysis requires that Europe either decrease its consumption and/or decrease its population. This disagreement goes to the very core of the issue (several issues) that Europe is struggling with. The financial pyramid scheme logic demands geometric growth, while ecological models demand immediate reduction and eventual stabilisation.
"It's quite proven that developed living conditions = low birth rates."
I am quite sure that contemporary Syrians live better than estonians did 100 years ago. Estonians were able to stop population growth already 100 years ago. Thus, the 'living conditions' you speak of are not absolute, but relative to other countries - which in turn means that Syrians should understand their problems and stop breeding at their current wealth levels. If they do not learn the lesson, then their population will crash.
0
@Zervo
/* "Whether Czech have more room and resources or not can only be assessed via ecological footprint analysis."
Are we seriously going to start to care about that only because people with brown skin "invades"? */
Absolutely, because that is the only way to avoid collapse.
"Seriously though, have you ever heard of the word import?"
That is part of the ecological footprint analysis.
"Again, are we seriously going to start giving a crap because Europe might have their population increased by a single procentual unit."
There is a fundamental disagreement that you don't seem to grasp.
All the talk about how Europe is becoming old and should have higher birth rates and/or more immigrants to increase its population are all to support the financial BAU (business as usual) Ponzi scheme(s). So the BAU demand more consumption, thus also more waste and more emissions. While the ecological footprint analysis requires that Europe either decrease its consumption and/or decrease its population. This disagreement goes to the very core of the issue (several issues) that Europe is struggling with. The financial pyramid scheme logic demands geometric growth, while ecological models demand immediate reduction and eventual stabilisation.
"It's quite proven that developed living conditions = low birth rates."
I am quite sure that contemporary Syrians live better than estonians did 100 years ago. Estonians were able to stop population growth already 100 years ago. Thus, the 'living conditions' you speak of are not absolute, but relative to other countries - which in turn means that Syrians should understand their problems and stop breeding at their current wealth levels. If they do not learn the lesson, then their population will crash.