Thread: Russia's immigration policy and public opinion

Within a thread in General Discussion, I asked why people emigrate and received the following answer:

"One most important reason is well-being. Most immigrate where they can make more money, have better things, eat better, be in greater safety, and so on. Cultural and political reasons are marginal: in fact, many immigrants try to preserve their cultural identity and are highly critical of their new host country's political system."

Now I'm wondering about how Russia's immigration policy is influenced by other countries and organizations and how its society feels they should respond.

(1) What real pressures are put on Russia to lessen restrictions on immigration?
(2) Would the indigenous society feel threatened by uncontrolled immigration?
(3) How will Russia benefit from any change in its immigration policy?

I'll share some things I've read recently, but what I'm really after is subjective opinion.

http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/pu ... 009138.pdf
http://bd.english.fom.ru/report/cat/soc ... a/ed003030
http://bd.english.fom.ru/report/cat/soc ... /etb003012

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Barbara

(1) What real pressures are put on Russia to lessen restrictions on immigration?

The appaling birth rate for one should be enough incentive to invite hard working, energetic people to come and work in Russia.

(2) Would the indigenous society feel threatened by uncontrolled immigration?

Yes, like in any other country. Russia's best bet might be to go for the Russians and other Slavs living in the near abroad (= former USSR republics). This would minimize the negative effects immigration has. To achieve this, however, these people must be offered clear incentives to move to Russia. A booming Russian economy vs. a stagnating, for example, Ukrainian one might do the trick, but this not only depends on Russia.

(3) How will Russia benefit from any change in its immigration policy?

It depends on the kind of immigrants you bring in. At the moment, Russia can't compete with the EU, let alone the US, for Indian and Chinese math/computer wizards. Heck, their own best minds often end up in Sillicon Valley. Still, immigration is necessary to keep the economy going even when the ratio of young people paying taxes vs. the elderly receiving pensions and other benefits gets poorer and poorer.

This is a frequent topic with my friends and family (all Russians) and the general attitude is;
1)They want more restrictions on immigration to decrease the competition for the few jobs that are available. They also believe a stricter immigration policy will decrease the number of terrorist acts such as metro bombings.

2) They feel threatened by both legal and illegal immigration. Rich foreigners moving in cause prices to rise out of the reach of the original population and poor immigrants cause taxes to rise to pay for their needed services.

3)They believe a more restrictive immigration law would greatly benefit Russia for the above reasons.

Originally Posted by Gollandski Yozh

The appaling birth rate for one should be enough incentive to invite hard working, energetic people to come and work in Russia.

This is what they do in the EU, but what for? Why is that the end-all reason? I would understand if they tried to do something to fix the birth rate among the native population; fixing the birth rate by borrowing from other countries, in the long run, is not much different from being occupied and assimilated by the other countries. I would even understand if the EU said "OK, we're going to be assimilated by China, and we're working hard to make that certain." Then I would have no problem. But no, the EU likes the ideas of sovereignty and nationality and cultural identity etc etc. Where is the logic? And why should Russia follow this lack of logic?

Don't just go and give me the US as an example: their internal birth rate is positive (and even there white non-Hispanic men are a decreasing minority now).

Last but not least, it is not clear yet what is going to happen with the birth rate in Russia when things finally stabilize.

Yes, like in any other country. Russia's best bet might be to go for the Russians and other Slavs living in the near abroad (= former USSR republics).

That is sensible. At least they share the same cultural values.

Still, immigration is necessary to keep the economy going even when the ratio of young people paying taxes vs. the elderly receiving pensions and other benefits gets poorer and poorer.

Why do you want the economy going in this case? Just because the economy must be going? The wheel is running but the hamster is dead, eh?

Originally Posted by bad manners

Originally Posted by "Gollandski Yozh":2kiz8peh

The appaling birth rate for one should be enough incentive to invite hard working, energetic people to come and work in Russia.

This is what they do in the EU, but what for? Why is that the end-all reason? I would understand if they tried to do something to fix the birth rate among the native population; fixing the birth rate by borrowing from other countries, in the long run, is not much different from being occupied and assimilated by the other countries. I would even understand if the EU said "OK, we're going to be assimilated by China, and we're working hard to make that certain." Then I would have no problem. But no, the EU likes the ideas of sovereignty and nationality and cultural identity etc etc. Where is the logic? And why should Russia follow this lack of logic?[/quote:2kiz8peh]

Because Russia has a lot of people who will grow old. The perestrojka and Yeltsin's "reforms" have caused a sharp drop in living standards and birth rate. That's a "gap" of some 15 years, even if we assume we'll see birthrates of 2,3 or something per woman now (which we won't).

So, we have a gap, but we still have a whole generation getting old, needing medical care, pensions etc. Who's gonna pay for all of that? There are too few young people to make up for this. It wouldn't be a bad idea at all to get "Ukrainian" Russians or "Kazakh" Russians to come and beef up the Russian population.

You talk about "fixing" the birth rate, but I don't see that happen. Emancipation, the want of a carreer and the desire to keep one's freedom will ensure Western women won't become baby factories anymore. Personally, I think that's fine. It's their choice. But for the demographics of the nation, any nation, this isn't a good thing. In fact, it's rather worrying. A slick ad campaign won't reverse this trend, though.

Don't just go and give me the US as an example: their internal birth rate is positive (and even there white non-Hispanic men are a decreasing minority now).

I will give the US as an example, because here immigration works, at least much better than it does in Europe. In the US, immigrants truly become Americans. Here, in Europe, we see a strong divide. You talk about occupation, very dramatic and all, but I don't see it that way. If immigrants assimilate, there is nothing wrong with them coming in.

Last but not least, it is not clear yet what is going to happen with the birth rate in Russia when things finally stabilize.

The birthrate of ethnic Russians was already a problem in Soviet days.

Still, immigration is necessary to keep the economy going even when the ratio of young people paying taxes vs. the elderly receiving pensions and other benefits gets poorer and poorer.

Why do you want the economy going in this case? Just because the economy must be going? The wheel is running but the hamster is dead, eh?

It must be kept going, because you have an elderly generation to pay for.

Originally Posted by Gollandski Yozh

You talk about "fixing" the birth rate, but I don't see that happen. Emancipation, the want of a carreer and the desire to keep one's freedom will ensure Western women won't become baby factories anymore. Personally, I think that's fine. It's their choice.

Indeed. So it may just as well be their choice to die young or spend their late years miserably. I don't see how your MLM-type solution may fix the problem in the long term.

But for the demographics of the nation, any nation, this isn't a good thing. In fact, it's rather worrying. A slick ad campaign won't reverse this trend, though.

Define "nation". If you replace each and every Dutchman with a Chinese in the Netherlands, provided that each of them has a valid Dutch passport, will that be the same Dutch nation for you?

I will give the US as an example, because here immigration works,

Bzzrt. A past tense here, please.

In the US, immigrants truly become Americans.

Ditto.

Here, in Europe, we see a strong divide. You talk about occupation, very dramatic and all, but I don't see it that way. If immigrants assimilate, there is nothing wrong with them coming in.

You got it backwards. You will be assimilated, not the immigrants. See the above example with the Chinese.

[quote:3o89n6iz]Last but not least, it is not clear yet what is going to happen with the birth rate in Russia when things finally stabilize.

The birthrate of ethnic Russians was already a problem in Soviet days. [/quote:3o89n6iz]
Since 80's, granted. That's when the whole thing started.

It must be kept going, because you have an elderly generation to pay for.

A nation that cannot support itself is doomed anyway. Refer to the hamster example.

In the US immigration works? Well I guess it works for the immigrants and the politicians but it is a huge burden on the rest of us. I lose 1/3 - 1/2 of my paycheck to taxes that pay for free medical care, government housing, free food and government ($) aid. Legal and illegal immigrants make up a significant number of the recipients of these aid programs. Also immigrant neighborhoods (not only poor areas but rich communities too) have a much higher crime rate with a gang and or mafia for each ethnic or cultural group. Again this cost taxpayers in both dollars and loss of quality of life.
The US immigration laws are very lax compared to the rest of the world. The INS hardly even paid attention to who was entering the country untill 9/11 woke them up!

Define "nation". If you replace each and every Dutchman with a Chinese in the Netherlands, provided that each of them has a valid Dutch passport, will that be the same Dutch nation for you?

If these Chinese assimilate, they will marry with Dutchmen and -women. Or at least a lot of them. The Netherlands will change, yes, but I don't see why that is a bad thing. Foreigners will come in gradually, the ones that preceded them will already have become "Dutch"; they eat cheese and "drop", they ice skate and they hate Germany when the Dutch football teams plays our beloved eastern neighbours. It's a slow process, those Chinese (although I'm not thinking about Asians) won't come in huge numbers and large stacks.

Just look at Russia. No one can truly claim he's Russian. My gf has Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian, Jewish, Polish and probably some Tatar or Mongol blood too... Still, Russia exists as a nation. If the process is a gradual one, I believe a national identity can be largely perserved, although there will be some changes. But that's time for you; you can't stop everything in it's tracks at a moment in time you find the "best" one.

Originally Posted by JB

In the US immigration works? Well I guess it works for the immigrants and the politicians but it is a huge burden on the rest of us. I lose 1/3 - 1/2 of my paycheck to taxes that pay for free medical care, government housing, free food and government ($) aid. Legal and illegal immigrants make up a significant number of the recipients of these aid programs. Also immigrant neighborhoods (not only poor areas but rich communities too) have a much higher crime rate with a gang and or mafia for each ethnic or cultural group. Again this cost taxpayers in both dollars and loss of quality of life.

I wonder where the US would have been without all those immigrants...

The US immigration laws are very lax compared to the rest of the world. The INS hardly even paid attention to who was entering the country untill 9/11 woke them up!

That has little to do with the issue at hand. I'm not advocating opening the borders and let anyone enter at will.

Without all those immigrants a lot of Native American Nations would still exist, cities would be less crowded and less dangerous and many areas would not have lost their culture and identity. Because unlike your experience (fantasy?) about the Dutch our experience here in California is that the majority of immigrants marry in their own ethnic group and work to change the community to their culture.

Originally Posted by JB

Without all those immigrants a lot of Native American Nations would still exist, cities would be less crowded and less dangerous and many areas would not have lost their culture and identity. Because unlike your experience (fantasy?) about the Dutch our experience here in California is that the majority of immigrants marry in their own ethnic group and work to change the community to their culture.

Those areas lost their culture and identity as soon as the Europeans showed up... It's not the Hispanics that made the Indians lose their territories...

Originally Posted by Gollandski Yozh

Define "nation". If you replace each and every Dutchman with a Chinese in the Netherlands, provided that each of them has a valid Dutch passport, will that be the same Dutch nation for you?

If these Chinese assimilate, they will marry with Dutchmen and -women. Or at least a lot of them.

You did not answer the question. You changed the conditions. What's the matter with you? Please answer the question just as it is asked or do not answer it at all.

Just look at Russia. No one can truly claim he's Russian. My gf has Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian, Jewish, Polish and probably some Tatar or Mongol blood too... Still, Russia exists as a nation.

Only because the ingredients you've named so far have either been mostly Russian culturally, or have been discriminated for ages and have become mostly Russian again. This is not what is going on with the immigration in the EU, because the EU is big on "tolerance" and so on.

Likewise, the American melting pot was working only as long as it was primarily the ethnic European immigration entering the country and the Blacks were segregated; none of which is true anymore, and then you may listen to JB.

I'd like to ask about some assumptions that are being made because I'm wondering how much these assumptions drive opinion.

Does Russia really depend on the younger generation to support its retirees in the same way the U.S. does (at present)?

Natural resources are privatized in the U.S. and the prevailing wisdom is to minimize taxes on the entities that develop them, so the proceeds are not available for the benefit of the people as a whole. Right now (it seems), the U.S. must depend on an ever-larger working "base" to support the retired and the infirm. Since the "recently indigenous" population of American women aren't "baby factories", it seems the U.S. must rely on immigrants to replenish this base. But is this really true of Russia? There, it seems, the government is moving more toward increasing the taxes on entities that develop Russia's natural resources. I think there may be a different plan in the works.

I wish I could remember where I read this, but... Hasn't the birth rate in Russia cycled in this way for the last few hundred years? Is the current "birth dearth" such a bad thing in a developed nation? I'm somewhat doubtful that it takes 300 million people to run the U.S. (we'll find out when the troops come home). How many people does it take to run Russia?

(I don't mean to be contentious here, but I don't think Russia is in dire need of immigrant mathematicians and computer programmers. Sure, there was that little glitch with the "ballistic reentry" when the astro- and cosmonauts returned from ISS, but comparatively speaking Russia holds its own.)

"If immigrants assimilate, there is nothing wrong with them coming in."

What conditions must an immigrant satisfy in order to assimilate?

"Define "nation". If you replace each and every Dutchman with a Chinese in the Netherlands, provided that each of them has a valid Dutch passport, will that be the same Dutch nation for you?"

What if there weren't nearly so many Chinese as to replace every or even many Dutchmen? What if they renounced citizenship in their homeland, understood and agreed with the Constitution, learned the language, loved the society and would defend it--even against their homeland (if it ever came to that)?

G Yozh said;
Those areas lost their culture and identity as soon as the Europeans showed up... It's not the Hispanics that made the Indians lose their territories... [/quote]

Earth to G Yozh!
I'm not talking past I'm talking PRESENT, TODAY, AT THIS VERY MINUTE! In Southern California the recent immigration of Chinese has turned many cities and suburbs around Los Angeles into politically and financially powerful miniture Hong Kong/ Taiwan. The signs are all in Chinese, the businesses are all Chinese, the hospitals and other public facilities only hire Chinese. If you worked there before the transformation you had better learn to speak Chinese or your job is in danger.
The same with other recent ethnic immigrations in all parts of Southern California. The Hispanics (many families original Californians) have been displaced by Armenians and Vietnamese. Neighborhoods that were long standing middle class Anglo culture are now "Little Saigon" and "Little Calcutta".

And here's a little pop quiz for you. Who originally invaded California, built a lot of Catholic Missions, enslaved all the Native Americans, then either worked them to death or killed them with smallpox? Johnny Appleseed? J.S.Bach? A bunch of Spanish speaking guys from Mexico (hint, hint)?

What chance have I got to become a legal resident in Russia - with the right to own stuff, maybe use the public library, or the hospital - and not just a foreign worker? I pay taxes and I contribute to the economy ...

And what chances have I got if I don't marry a Russian gal?

Aside from the question of whether I can actually become a resident, do you think I should be able to?

vlelly intellesting...

In London we have faced this 'problem' for decades .. I have seen the transformation with my own eyes. I don't really know whether it's good or bad, honestly. But it's how the world is going..

[quote=bad manners]

Originally Posted by "Gollandski Yozh":12y26vl8

Define "nation". If you replace each and every Dutchman with a Chinese in the Netherlands, provided that each of them has a valid Dutch passport, will that be the same Dutch nation for you?

If these Chinese assimilate, they will marry with Dutchmen and -women. Or at least a lot of them.

You did not answer the question. You changed the conditions. What's the matter with you? Please answer the question just as it is asked or do not answer it at all.[/quote:12y26vl8]

Ah, I see you are starting to have problems again controlling your temper... What's the matter with me? Jeez... Didn't answer to one of your questions... Be nice, and I'll play nice.

To come back to the question you "requested" me to answer. No, if you would replace every Dutchman by a Chinese who takes with him Chinese culture, language etc. and doesn't blend in with the original population the Dutch nation is gone.

This, however, is not what I propose.

[quote:12y26vl8]Just look at Russia. No one can truly claim he's Russian. My gf has Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian, Jewish, Polish and probably some Tatar or Mongol blood too... Still, Russia exists as a nation.

Only because the ingredients you've named so far have either been mostly Russian culturally, or have been discriminated for ages and have become mostly Russian again. This is not what is going on with the immigration in the EU, because the EU is big on "tolerance" and so on.[/quote:12y26vl8]

Because EU immigration is a mess. I don't advocate opening the gates and let us be flooded by foreigners. I want immigrants to

1. know or be willing to immediately upon arrival learn Dutch

2. have skills that are economically or otherwise beneficial to the Netherlands

3. have a job upon arrival

In short, Dutch companies should go "man hunting" in Eastern Europe mostly, to find those people that will meet these criteria. I'm not talking about spontaneous immigration, I'm talking about controlled immigration to our benefit. These people will not become social parias, since they have a job and speak Dutch, and also not poor, because if companies are willing to go and get them, they must be able to do something right to earn a living.

Now, you may be thinking about asylum seekers. They, if they are genuine asylum seekers, are still welcome. I see that as a moral duty, but "fakes" should be turned back asap. No leeches.

Likewise, the American melting pot was working only as long as it was primarily the ethnic European immigration entering the country and the Blacks were segregated; none of which is true anymore, and then you may listen to JB.

The American immigration model doesn't work anymore today. But it has worked wonders in the past. I propose selection at the gate, NOT a green card lottery.

Originally Posted by JB

G Yozh said;
Those areas lost their culture and identity as soon as the Europeans showed up... It's not the Hispanics that made the Indians lose their territories...

Earth to G Yozh!
I'm not talking past I'm talking PRESENT, TODAY, AT THIS VERY MINUTE! In Southern California the recent immigration of Chinese has turned many cities and suburbs around Los Angeles into politically and financially powerful miniture Hong Kong/ Taiwan. The signs are all in Chinese, the businesses are all Chinese, the hospitals and other public facilities only hire Chinese. If you worked there before the transformation you had better learn to speak Chinese or your job is in danger.
The same with other recent ethnic immigrations in all parts of Southern California. The Hispanics (many families original Californians) have been displaced by Armenians and Vietnamese. Neighborhoods that were long standing middle class Anglo culture are now "Little Saigon" and "Little Calcutta".

And here's a little pop quiz for you. Who originally invaded California, built a lot of Catholic Missions, enslaved all the Native Americans, then either worked them to death or killed them with smallpox? Johnny Appleseed? J.S.Bach? A bunch of Spanish speaking guys from Mexico (hint, hint)?

Uncontrolled immigration. I'm against it. Said that. If you are going to have green card lotteries, you're on the wrong track, because any dumb ass could enter the country. I bet the Chinese math wizards in Sillicon Valley aren't the ones who have a problem assimilating.

You bring in quality, you get quality. You let everyone in, you get a nice mess.

Like I said, immigrants will have to meet a set of demands.

If you want to throw the net a little wider...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/talkin ... 571799.stm

I asked my neigbour, a truck driver, what he thought about immigrants. Bring'em on he said brandishing a wrench. I don't think this country needs immigrants - this country needs organic food, disposable anti-dundruff wooshangas and fast Internet. With our unsurpassed computer geniuses highly sophisticated robots will soon be doing all the grafting and people will be living like gods. Genetic engineers will creat a new breed of people to compensate for the low birth rate.