thank God we are... it wasn't too long ago we open up our boarders for certain people, who are now the main cause for the foreign problems we have, and remember that in the UK.. there are more foreigners with British Passports than there are Brits.....
Also people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.. ie the british Government is responsible along with the yanks, for the dilemma we now have in the world.....

one shouldn't forget that one criteria for becoming a Swiss National is that one is integrated into the Swiss way of life and one Speaks the Lingo......
and how many do that !!!!,
There are also some countries that do not allow dual Nationality...
thus the so called "secondos", are quiet happy whith the permit C...

Surely, the fault would be that their parents haven't obtained Nationality for their off-spring from their own country?

Post of the day!

Yes it is. You probably hung around the City and West End of of London.
A lot has changed since 2000 and that is only nine years ago, the pace of the downfall is amazing.

Go to other parts of London and the outskirts like Brixton, Southall, East London.

Sorry I don't understand what city-planning has to do with immigration.
It is the immigrants that decide where they want to live and they create in effect their own comunes. The so-called discrimination becomes against the original british (shall we say white) nationals.
You even state yourself in (C) that immigration makes it worse in Switzerland!

So you are agreeing that too much immigration creates problems, so why would the people of a country want to give Nationality nilly-willy and restrict the flexibilty to reject undesirables if they are found to be so.


Could you explain that "I won't succeed in the long term, even though I might succeed professionally". I would appreciate your advise on this statement so as not to fail in my life in Switzerland, so perhaps you can expand on that for me? I don't mind criticism provided it comes with an explanation as I try to improve myself continually.

__________________
I do not have friends..........I have contingent liabilities

I am assuming that the parents' country of origin won't recognize their offspring as citizens if they are not born in that country and have never lived there. If I am wrong, then I stand corrected. In fact, I want to be corrected.

I am also assuming that Swiss immigration authorities wouldn't normally grant residence to anyone whom they thought might impact Swiss society in a negative manner.

Is that even possible in most countries?

Yes, I've heard the same story almost unanimously from British expats from Cyprus to Panama to the state of Georgia in the US. None are retired. All are from age late 20s to late 50s. Nearly all in business for themselves or some sort of high paying profession, either previously or presently. These are the very people that keeps the UK a viable and civilized country to live in, and they are leaving in droves. They all either are angry as hell, or just don't give a s**t anymore about the UK. So yea, I'd say there are a heap of big problemas in the mother country. Makes me sick to my stomach just thinking about it.

For the most part the children assume the nationality of the parents, so I can put your mind at ease.... They do not become stateless persons just because they are born outside their country of origin.

And not impacting a country in a ngetaive manner is not necessarily the same as being fully integrated and highly desirable.

I'm in total agreement that full integration should be acheived before citizenship can be attained.

I guess what I have seen in the states concerning this subject has caused me to subcounciously come to believe that doing no harm is the absolute best anyone can hope for, and actually doing good is like the Forms in The Republic, which can never be attained; only strived for.

Normally obtain Nationality of parents.
If that is not possible, then the Swiss should not let the parents in or give them a permit, in the first place because they are a long term liability possibly.

I can tell you the UK is in a mess.

As I have said before, you just need to drive around Calais or read about Calais to see all the people "claiming political asylum".
If these asylum seekers really had been scared for their lives, they would apply to any country for assylum.
You are having al laugh stating that they are heading to England becuase they might speak English. It is the cushy easy benefit system that drives them in.
Then when they get into the UK, get a NI number somehow, they are on the scrounge.
Then their relatives turn up "to England on a holiday to visit" or to "study" at a phoney college but never return.

A substancial number of my clients have been planning to move out of the UK and they are pretty ordinary middle class.
Unfortunately for them, a lot will now struggle to do so as the equity in their house has fallen, sterling has fallen and employment elsewhere in this global recession has fallen and will continue to fall.

The UK is already over-populated, has a poor infrastructure due to poor investment because it has spunked the money on quangos and helping politcial assylum seekers and immigrants.

The East Europeans (Polish) left in back end of 2008 because the pound fell against the Zotti and the wages went up in Poland.
Unemployment and the recession has now hit Poland and they are returning to England with their families becausethe benefit system in the UK is better than in Poland.

I find it quite amusing because even my Asian friends are moaning about the East Europeans scounging off the state. They get embarrassed when I remind them that they were the same 15 years ago.

The problem now is that a lot of these immigrants are now in political positions and councils in the UK (fault of the complacent original Nationals) and are providing for their own.

The UK can only go downhill; the immigration is such a drain on society.

I just hope this doesn't happen in Switzerland and that the Swiss people with their referendums, see this, and prevent the downfall that will occur in the whole of the EU in time.
Hence my anger at the Swiss treaty with the EU over frree employment over the last few years.
Switzerland is in a position to be choosey and why shouldn't it be choosey?

__________________
I do not have friends..........I have contingent liabilities

Well, just in case you have not noticed... we are surrounded

Plus, the EU is our most important trade partner for im- and export. It would be dangerously stupid not to negotiate something while we are able to... now to decide wether the outcome is good or bad - only time will tell... there is no such thing as a magic crystal ball to find out.

The country whose nationailty the parents hold always gives the offspring the right to acquire that nationaility. So nobody need be without nationality. Whether that nationailty is appropriate and matches their culture and way of life is another question.

If people want your goods they will buy and overcome the barriers in importing and exporting.
Importing and Exporting goods has little to do with immigration.

Negotiating being the correct word. Do you homework before negotiating and be a good negoiator (benefit of your own country not necessarily doing what you believe other nations want to see you do - The Tamils in 70's was an example I believe)

Looking at what is happening to the UK and Western EU is enough evidence at the moment. Exactly, Switzerland doesn't need to rush into open doors for immigrants which it basically has done with the EU employment treaty.

__________________
I do not have friends..........I have contingent liabilities

One of my criticisms of the UK is that since the 1980s it has become too centralized. Margaret Thatcher turned "Federalism" into a dirty word (for a while it became known as the "F-word"), claiming that it would cede power to Europe. In reality she was busy centralizing power in London.

From that perspective I very much value the Swiss system where local issues are put to the vote by locals. (Even though I don't have the right to vote, I can see that my friends and colleagues do have that right.)

But we know that asylum seekers are basically treated like scum in certain Western European countries, therefore it makes sense that asylum seekers are going to try and reach a land where they believe they will be treated decently. Additionally there's factors like the language or that there may be an existing community of people from that country in London. Obviously there's clearly also people who want to get into Britain not because they are in fear of their life. However you're painting a bit too much of an black and white picture here.

Well I guess they'll benefit from a liberal immigration policy then.

This is edging onto BNP territory here making the difference British citizens and "ethnically" British citizens. Do you also have any concrete rather than anecdotal evidence of discrimination against white British nationals?

Sorry, but that just lacks some reality - the extra effort and money involved in this has a very direct impact on the decision wether to buy goods here or not.

Negotiating means to take and give. So usually you bundle topics - trade and immigration for example.

Wether we just opened all doors or not... probably depends on your political point of view... or do you believe Switzerland does not need any immigrants at all?

	Quote:	JVC
	One of my criticisms of the UK is that since the 1980s it has become too centralized. Margaret Thatcher turned "Federalism" into a dirty word (for a while it became known as the "F-word"), claiming that it would cede power to Europe. In reality she was busy centralizing power in London. From that perspective I very much value the Swiss system where local issues are put to the vote by locals. (Even though I don't have the right to vote, I can see that my friends and colleagues do have that right.)

I did use weakness in that particular aspect. While you might get very good support in certain cities (usually with a large immigrant population), you get nothing where they are not too visible and/or the local authority do not want to spend money on that issue. It is more or less the same about social welfare.

Decentralization is good for many thing but we are arriving today to its limits. Switzerland has a rather small territory with many little municipalities. While it did make sense at the time of limited mobility and technology; it does not anymore make sense today. We need to reduce the amount of municipalities and also some of the extravagant things we used to have.

A simple example, less than 10 years ago, Wallis authorities wanted to reorganize the public health system. People complained that they did not want to give birth in Brig instead of Visp because they wanted to be from this particular region. It is less than 10 km away!!!! (9 to be precise).

Offering the same chance for a new comer to get a cultural awareness and language course everywhere in Switzerland is not evil centralization, it just makes sense.

We have no Federal Education Ministry since Napoleon… That’s why the school system is messy. A coordination role has to be given to the Confederacy. I do not want everything being “ordered” but at least a bit more coordinate.

A) What you "demand" of the SVP is the quadratisation of the circle. They became as large as they are now by the aggressive tactics introduced by Ayatollah Blocher and his "assistants". That aggressive way has brought them uncountable protest voters, and allowed them to expand.
B) Great Britain had the empire (Switzerland none) which means that millions of "Third Worlders" had British passports. A well established Egyptian in 1910 for instance used to have three passports, one of the Kingdom of Egypt, one of the Turkish Empire (to which Egypt nominally still belonged) and one of Great Britain (which had actual control). The situation with people in Africa from the Sahara down to the Cape, and in Greater India (Pakistan, Nepal, India, Burma) plus in Malaya, Australia, the Caribbean, etc was not much different. A good part of the "non-native" population in Great Britain either themselves entered with British passports or are descendants of people who did do so.



This has been that way in Switzerland for a long time, but the increasing "community" of Swiss Expats abroad succeeded in getting full voting rights to be done by mail.



A) the share of foreigners nowhere makes the "natives" tolerant
B) to equate diversity and tolerance is wrong. Switzerland with 3 and a half languages indeed is diverse, but if you see that tolerance at times is missing even in intra-Swiss matters, then it is obvious that diversity does not necessarily generate tolerance. And that the majority in Switzerland is the one learning the language of a minority neither is tolerance nor benevolence but realism and the know-how to keep the country together. Just get a look at the federal army. Army units are militarily under federal command but in administrative matters under the command of one of the Cantonal Military Commands. And the rule is that most units are either German speaking or French speaking or Italian speaking. "Mixed" units are the exception. Here again, diversity is not to be mixed up with other expressions.




First of all, even if an unlikely majority of EU MPs were in favour of dropping the nation-countries, these nation-countries would continue to exist. Second, I cannot quite see countries giving up themselves and government love to be phased out. And third I do not quite see why the "threat" of Tony Blair should be a reason for Switzerland not to go ahead with the Bilateral Treaties, which for Switzerland are important and extremely useful.