Lion in Winter

And bad enough conditions that they would risk their lives in those crossings?

I bet they don't all come to steal if what they believe is that they can make a decent living. If Spain can't support them that is another matter. Their own countries need fixing and I'm sure they would rather stay there if they could earn a way out of economic misery.

two tubes of toothpaste

I don't think worries about 'bad conditions' and 'risking their lives' enters any sort of thought process for one with youthful exuberance.

I wouldn't for a moment suggest that any of them come to Europe to steal. It's just that when they get here and find out the economic reality, getting a plane home is not an option, and therefore survival kicks in.

Sally Redux

I think it does. I wouldn't have risked my life like that however exuberant I was when young.

two tubes of toothpaste

Forewarned is forearmed, but who warns them before they set out ?

Lion in Winter

I can't speak for Africans, but the desperate Mexicans and Guatemalans I know are most definitely aware of the risks and know why they are coming - to help their families survive. I would imagine those from African counties are well aware of how many drown, just as Mexicans and Guatemalans are aware of how many die in the desert crossing. All the families will know.

Yes, they have to survive if there are not jobs, but surely the answer is not to encourage people to shoot at them. That won't enable them to go home either. I suppose all I'm saying is that nothing will be accomplished by simply viewing them as the enemy and encouraging others to do the same. It will only harden the lines more. Their countries of origin need proper economic assistance that will actually build them up and allow them to establish systems of government. Until that happens, they will keep on coming.

two tubes of toothpaste

You've convinced me. I shall allow the little rascals to lever my neighbour's front gate off its hinges in future.

rugbymatt

Yeah, because that the logical conclusion of what LiW was saying...

jimenato

Hmmm - more or less what I was thinking.

Two Tubes once blamed an uncharacteristically odd post on the drink - but at 4.50 am? Suppose it's possible.

amideislas

Look at it this way;

If you were born and raised in a world where you will never be able to live in more than a hut, where it's acceptable to steal water, food and basic living necessities, and it's inconceivable that you will ever have luxuries such as a house or car and can be protected from those just like you, then what we take for granted is like winning the jackpot.

now, considering that most of the world survives a living standard closer to that description than any description of what we take for granted, it's no wonder that there's a huge demand.

I think it also points out how we should be a bit more thankful for all the luxuries we enjoy. Home, car, electricity, abundant food, security, healthcare...

For example, if you feel "ripped off" because you now have to pay a small amount for prescriptions, consider that much of the world can't even get prescriptions at all, and for many, "health care" is a foggy notion at best.

Having said that, it's also completely unrealistic that we can solve the problem with money. We are prosperous because of the way our socio-economic system is designed. Those people aren't prosperous because of the system they live under.

Throwing money at it doesn't solve it - not permanently, anyway. Economic aid only provides temporary relief, and much of it ends up in the pockets of the corrupt leadership of those countries anyway. Obviously, you also can't just open your borders, either.

The most effective solution is political pressure combined with economic incentives, which is mostly what we attempt to do.

Giving away fish only means you'll forever give away fish. But when you give them a fishing pole, then they can have their fish without being dependent on your handouts.

Applying political and economic pressure on the leadership of those places where living standards are pathetic is still the most effective solution, even if it often renders limited results, it's still the best solution, because when successful, it solves so many far-reaching problems, including this one.

Unfortunately, when you are born and raised in a world where self-servitude is survival, leadership born of that mindset isn't likely to suddenly become interested in others' prosperity.

scrubbedexpat095

Just logged in to say

Lion in Winter

I agree with most of what you say, with the notable exception of the red highlighted bit. By and large the wealthy nations do no such thing - there is sporadic economic aid to some of the countries and regimes that we currently favour - everywhere else (and sometimes in those same countries) we have a long and sorry history of funding and propping up dictators, selling them weaponry, repressing the development of political institutions that would allow a country to develop the self-government it needs and not be under the thumb of a strong man and a handful of corrupt individuals.

Had the wealthy nations, since, say, the early 20th century, invested in countries a sum similar to that which they have spent arming them, invading them, and generally interfering with their development, we would be living in a different world now.

HBG

Apologies from the colonists for mistakes from the long distant past have now been made ad nauseam and we should move on. Our current refugee epidemic stems from a religious war in the Middle East not of our making.

We can't quite close our borders and let the savages get on with it, tempting as that notion may be, but our religion generally compels us to help our neighbours rather than kill them.

The New York, London and Madrid bombings have severely tested our patience and there is now a ground swell of public opinion to put a stop to
the fanatics attacking us from within. It wouldn't take much more to set off a political movement that would make UKIP look like a garden tea party.

Unfortunately it would set back our entire civilisation to previous dark times, but all the experts predict atrocities much worse than any so far. Dick Cheney was the last politician to say so and he is quite well informed.

EMR

The hands Dick Cheney , his fellow right wing politicians supported by the lobbyists for the US defence indsustry are just as dirty as any Islamic extremsts.
Cheney and his like will never be held accountable for the illegal invasion of Iraq, thw WMD myth and the state of arnachy their policies and actions have helped to create across much of the Muslim world.

lutonlad

Fair enough to expect someone on the Left to blame all the worlds problems on right wing politicians.

But I certainly agree with the WMD myth. In fact I'd go further...

When I heard Tony Blairs famous speech, talking about mass destruction in 45 minutes, I immediately thought it was a load of crap. How the hell anyone could have been taken in by that garbage is beyond me. The great British public couldn't have been that thick... could they?

EMR

If Just to the left of centre is waht you mean then we are the majority of the voting public,
Was the world a safer place before Cheney and crew or NOT ?.