World News

39046 readers

2460 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

‘Anti-European’ populists on track for big gains in EU elections, says report (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Populist “anti-European” parties are heading for big gains in June’s European elections that could shift the parliament’s balance sharply to the right and jeopardise key pillars of the EU’s agenda including climate action, polling suggests.

Polling in all 27 EU member states, combined with modelling of how national parties performed in past European parliament elections, shows radical right parties are on course to finish first in nine countries including Austria, France and Poland.

Projected second- or third-place finishes in another nine countries, including Germany, Spain, Portugal and Sweden, could for the first time produce a majority rightwing coalition in the parliament of Christian Democrats, conservatives and radical right MEPs.

Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How would unfettered immigration (assuming it exists) cause an economic downturn?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

If it did exist (and it doesn't), it would be an excessive cause of government spending. Money that could otherwise be used to pay for other services like health or pension spending, or subsidize (read as: "cut taxes on") necessary stuff like food or petrol.

I think their argument per se does make sense, it's just the initial assumption that is flawed.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

But "wasting" government resources on immigrants (those few that don't work and as such don't enrich the country they immigrate to) would only impact the economy if the health of the economy is reliant on government help. Just because the government is spending more, doesn't mean the economy is worse.. (often time it's actually better off with government spending). Unless we see massive tax increases in such countries that will impact wealth generation and labor costs etc. I cannot see any negative impact on economic health.

Quite the opposite. Immigration usually helps fill in gaps in "economic planning" and the extra labor helps the economy. And increased government spending for the poorer groups of the population usually boosts the economy a lot more than tax cuts. So any negative economic impact of immigration has to overcome these positive ones.

That said, there are certainly other, non-economic reasons against immigration, but that wasn't the point.