German & Austrian voters support Swiss-style immigration quotas for EU-residents

[Franzl]

At the same time, German and Austrian voters expressing support for a racist idea isn't exactly a novelty.

I'm willing to bet a majority in most countries would express support for this idea.

(I'm against it...but at the same time, it's not exactly a "racist" concept.)

[Tender Branson]

If the Germans and Austrians can feel free to violate the Schengen agreements, they'd better shut up if Italy or Greece does the same regarding the austerity treaties.

Which examples do you mean with "violating the Schengen agreement" ?

[Antonio the Sixth]

If the Germans and Austrians can feel free to violate the Schengen agreements, they'd better shut up if Italy or Greece does the same regarding the austerity treaties.

Which examples do you mean with "violating the Schengen agreement" ?

I'm pretty sure immigration quotas would violate it.

[Tender Branson]

If the Germans and Austrians can feel free to violate the Schengen agreements, they'd better shut up if Italy or Greece does the same regarding the austerity treaties.

Which examples do you mean with "violating the Schengen agreement" ?

I'm pretty sure immigration quotas would violate it.

Not necessarily I think: Schengen is an greement that ensures people are not stopped at the borders for short-term travel purposes, not an agreement for long-term residency or work.

If for example work or residency quotas would be issued in lets say Austria, people could still come in for travel purposes without being checked at the border.

Only the residency/work-permits would be subject to quotas: Businesses/cities would be allowed to hire/register only a certain amount of people on a first-come-first-serve basis.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh, that's too bad. Looks like as most things Europe does, Schengen doesn't go far enough.

[MaxQue]

Also: If I remember correctly, even the country you live in (Canada) has immigration quotas and handpicks skilled workers. So, it must be racist too, right ?

Europe has Schengen, Canada doesn't.

[Franzl]

Also: If I remember correctly, even the country you live in (Canada) has immigration quotas and handpicks skilled workers. So, it must be racist too, right ?

Europe has Schengen, Canada doesn't.

We can argue about whether it's good or bad policy, but your claim is "supporting immigration quotas" is racist because there's such a thing as Schengen, but the same policy is not racist if there's no such agreement? Did I get that right?

[Franknburger]

While I think the term racism is inappropriate here, xenophobia is certainly an issue. Let's have a look at the facts:

1. Across the whole EU, in 2010/2011 (last available data I could find), there have only been two countries with a positive migration saldo of own citizens. All other EU members tend to be outmigration countries as concerns own citizens (though several are immigration targets for other EU citizens). Which were these two EU member states? Not Germany (23k net outmigration, 0.03% of citizens), not Austria (7k net outmigration, ~ 0.1% of citizens). No, it was Malta and Denmark.
In this context, it is worth noting that the top two German outmigration targets have been Switzerland (9.5k net) and Austria (4k net). Further relevant targets (~ 1k each) include France, the UK and the USA. This corresponds to a net immigration of 4.5k French, 3.5k British, and 2-2.5k each Swiss, Austrian and US citizens  (yes, there are more Americans migrating to Germany now than the other way round, leading the poor Germans to search for shelter in the Alps...).

Therefore, I support that the EU "free-movement policy" is amended so that if for example immigration/population growth tops 0.5% for 2 consecutive years in a 5 year time-span, a country would be free to set immigration quotas to protect the domestic economy and local communities from the problems above + wage dumping.

2. Don't have figures at hand for Austria, but net EU immigration into Germany has so far remained far below Tender's suggested threshold of 0.5%. It has picked up strongly after 2009, and in 2012 (last data available) peaked at 260k, i.e. 0,32%. of the population. If such levels already raise popular concern, regulation as proposed by Tender will be nothing more than populist actionism, without any effect on popular sentiment nor on actual migration flows.

3. There is considerable variation among German states. A comprehensive overview is only available for 2012, and includes EU as well as non-EU migrants. It shows the following ranking of states (migration surplus as share of total population):

1. Berlin (+0.88%)
2. Bremen (+0.69%)
3. Hamburg (+0.67%)
4./5. Bavaria / Baden-Würtemberg (+0.61% each)
6. Hesse (+0.57%)
..
13. Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (+0.24%)
13./15. Brandenburg / Thüringen (+0.22%)
16. Sachsen-Anhalt (+0.17%)

No surprise here. Immigration targets the boomtowns with comparatively low unemployment (Bremen may be a bit of an exception in that respect). Infrastructure (traffic & housing) could become some of an issue here. However, so far, neither the mayors of Hamburg nor of Lübeck (also quite a target) have complained - to the opposite, they are celebrating the fact that their cities are growing again. As to wage dumping - see "minimum wage".
This underlines my impression that we are having a very populist discussion, where people that are not concerned talk about problems those that might be concerned are not having. [Would have been interesting, btw., to see a regional breakdown of the German poll. The partisan breakdown lets me assume people in Berlin, Hamburg, Bremen, Munich or Frankfurt being far less concerned, even though they are living where immigration is most of an issue].

4. So, what is all of this really about? Top sources of EU immigration into Germany 2012:
1. Poland      +69k
2. Romania   +49k
3. Hungary   +26k
4. Bulgaria   +26k
5. Greece     +20k
6. Italy        +16k
7. Spain       +14k
8. Portugal    +6k

Euro crisis-related immigration is becoming relevant, but the main source is still Eastern Europe. Oh, yeah, the wild hordes from the eastern steppes (Huns, Turks), are raising their ugly head again, threatening to drive Germanic people across the Rhine and laying siege to Vienna. Some deeply entrenched historical experiences appear to never go away. Especially not, if some politicians are always eager to revoke them for short-term political benefit..

[MaxQue]

Also: If I remember correctly, even the country you live in (Canada) has immigration quotas and handpicks skilled workers. So, it must be racist too, right ?

Europe has Schengen, Canada doesn't.

We can argue about whether it's good or bad policy, but your claim is "supporting immigration quotas" is racist because there's such a thing as Schengen, but the same policy is not racist if there's no such agreement? Did I get that right?

My claim is than the proposed change is driven by racism. Not the policy in itself, but the action, because of the likely reason behind it.

[Franzl]

Also: If I remember correctly, even the country you live in (Canada) has immigration quotas and handpicks skilled workers. So, it must be racist too, right ?

Europe has Schengen, Canada doesn't.

We can argue about whether it's good or bad policy, but your claim is "supporting immigration quotas" is racist because there's such a thing as Schengen, but the same policy is not racist if there's no such agreement? Did I get that right?

My claim is than the proposed change is driven by racism. Not the policy in itself, but the action, because of the likely reason behind it.

Well, besides the fact that there is no "proposed change", as this is merely a pollster who asked this question in an opinion poll, I think we must have seperate definitions of "race", and as a result, "racism".

[Tender Branson]

Also: If I remember correctly, even the country you live in (Canada) has immigration quotas and handpicks skilled workers. So, it must be racist too, right ?

Europe has Schengen, Canada doesn't.

We can argue about whether it's good or bad policy, but your claim is "supporting immigration quotas" is racist because there's such a thing as Schengen, but the same policy is not racist if there's no such agreement? Did I get that right?

My claim is than the proposed change is driven by racism. Not the policy in itself, but the action, because of the likely reason behind it.

It's not like immigration quotas would keep a single race out, nor does any politician intend to achieve this with introducing these quotas: It's only to keep immigration at an acceptable level, because - theoretically - in the "EU's free movement policy" population growth rates in a country of lets say 5% a year would also be possible if this country is appealing for people while other countries experience a recession and out-migration ... Switzerland, a country that is already densely populated (yes, it is - for example relative to Canada) is experiencing this right now, just with population growth rates of 1% (which is pretty high for a developed and densely populated country). But saying that the reduction is "racist" is odd, because the quotas would still bring in people from all races and countries, just fewer and in a more sustainable way. In the end, it's also a way to show people from other countries that countries like Switzerland are not the Schlaraffenland where these people can move to like moving into paradise. We are not paradise, or a hotel for the whole world - nor should we be ...

PS: I will answer Franknburger's post later when I have some more time, but now I need to iron my clothes first ...