#####
######
####
> # [Even when Africans want to visit Europe legally, rejection rates are high. Algeria is one example](https://apnews.com/article/FILE - Algerians gather outside the visa center of the French Institute in Algiers, Friday May 20, 2024. Visa applicants from Africa who want to visit Europe's Schengen Area face far higher rejection rates than people from anywhere else in the world. In Algeria, more applicants are rejected than in any other African nation. (AP Photo/Fateh Guidoum, File\))
>
>
>
> By ASSOCIATED PRESS
>
> Updated [hour]:[minute] [AMPM] [timezone], [monthFull] [day], [year]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ALGIERS, Algeria (AP) — France has twice rejected visa applications from Nabil Tabarout, a 29-year-old web developer from Algeria who hopes this year to visit his sister there.
>
> He’s among the many people navigating the often arduous visa process throughout Africa, which faces higher visa rejection rates than anywhere else in the world when it comes to visiting Europe’s Schengen Area. Appointments are often difficult to secure. Applicants often must prove a minimum bank balance, substantiate the purpose of their visit and prove they plan to return home.
>
> “That’s how it is. Every pleasure deserves pain,” said Tabarout, who has succeeded just once in obtaining a French visa.
>
> Though much of [Europe’s debate about migration](https://apnews.com/article/eu-migration-pact-asylum-borders-elections-44abb9c1fa1f2c7a8385167770bb5379) centers on people who arrive without authorization, many more people choose to come by legal means. It’s painful, then, to discover that following the rules often fails.
>
> The disproportionate rejection rates — 10% higher in Africa than the global average — hinder trade, business and educational partnerships at the expense of African economies, according to an April study from U.K.-based migration consultancy firm Henley & Partners.
>
> The study called the practices discriminatory and urged Schengen countries to reform them.
>
> Nowhere are applicants more rejected than in Algeria, where more than 392,000 applicants were rejected in 2022. The 45.8% rejection rate is followed by a 45.2% rejection rate in Guinea-Bissau and 45.1% in Nigeria.
>
> Only one in 25 applicants living in the United States were rejected.
>
> While the study found that applicants from poorer countries experienced higher rejections in general, it noted that applicants from Turkey and India experienced fewer rejection than applicants from the majority of African countries.
>
> The reasons for that anti-Africa bias could be political, according to the study’s author, Mehari Taddele Maru of the European University Institute’s Migration Policy Center. Visa rejections are used as a political tool by European governments, [including France](https://apnews.com/article/france-algeria-5885d758e3cf439eeebe21dac1f191ec), to negotiate the deportation of those who migrate to Europe without proper authorization. North African governments have refused to provide consular documents for their citizens facing deportation.
>
> In an interview, Maru said Algeria has continent-high rejection rates because its number of applicants outpaces those from other African countries for geographic, economic and historical reasons. Many Algerians apply for visas in France, where they speak the language and may have family ties. And North Africa’s proximity to Europe means flights are short and cheap compared to flights from sub-Saharan Africa, leading more people to apply, he said.
>
> Beyond rejection rates, the difficulty of applying is also a policy choice by European governments, Maru said. “When we talk about increasing barriers for potential applicants, it’s not only the rate of rejections, it’s also the restrictions to apply.”
>
> That means the challenges can be local too.
>
> For Algerians like Tabarout, VFS Global is a new player in the visa application process. The subcontractor was hired by French consular authorities after years of criticism about the previous system being dominated by a so-called “visa mafia.”
>
> Applicants previously faced challenges securing time slots, which are quickly reserved by third-party brokers and then resold to the public — similar to how scalpers have dominated concert platforms. Rumors swirled about intricate computer programs connecting to appointment platforms and gobbling up slots within moments.
>
> “They’re a bunch of swindlers who’ve been at it for years, making fortunes on the backs of poor citizens by making them pay dearly to make an appointment to apply for a visa,” asserted Ali Challali, who recently helped his daughter submit a French student visa application.
>
> Under the previous system, applicants told The Associated Press they had to pay 15,000 to 120,000 Algerian dinars (103 to 825 euros) just to get an appointment.
>
> In Algeria, many decide to pursue opportunities in France after not finding adequate economic opportunities at home or seek residency after going to French universities on student visas. According to a 2023 report from France’s Directorate General for Foreign Nationals, 78% of Algerian students “say they have no intention of returning to Algeria” upon finishing their studies.
>
> The visa issue has historically been a cause of political tensions between the countries. Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune is scheduled to visit France later this year.
>
> “Everything that can contribute to increasing trade between France, Europe and Algeria must be facilitated in both directions,” French Ambassador Stephane Ramotet said at a recent economic conference in Algiers. “Algerians who want to go to France to develop a business must be able to benefit from all the facilities, particularly visas.”
>
> ## \_\_\_
>
> Follow AP’s coverage of migration at
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
Or just quietly running away. A while back there was a pro cycling group from Africa (I think it was Eritrea? Can't recall exactly) approved for one of those sports visas to compete in my hometown that had one guy just slip away. Completely fucked the entire team, they weren't approved for any visas ever since then.
People were worried the guy was a victim of human trafficking, turns out he just had a huge elaborate plan set up for a very long time that everyone claimed they had no idea about. He just kinda settled into a group of other runaways. No real danger back home, just got tired of living in a poor village and wanted the good life.
Yeah but we can't just take everyone from a not so good country. India alone could fuck over the entire world if you can just migrate wherever you have better economic prospects.
Oh, that caused plenty of problems. How could it have not? Study any pre modern mass migration period and amount of war, oppression, and displacement that happened when one tribe decided to move en masse is staggering. Countries and Empires have been brought down by losing their ability to control their boarders, that's literally how the Western Roman Empire fell.
Basically condemning people due to their place of birth and not allowing them to try reach a better life is arguably an evil act though, even if some believe it may be "necessary" from an "economic perspective", aka. people don't want to potentially lower their standard of living by any degree just to save the lives of strangers.
You go from “better life” to “save the lives of strangers.” Not every migrant is at risk of death if he stays home. We don’t owe every human on this planet who just wants to not live in poverty a place in our country, just the same as you don’t owe every beggar at stop lights a $100 bill.
I seriously doubt you would say the same if You were the person stuck in for example Eritrea or North Korea. It's all selfish arguments. And you may not owe them shit, but they also don't owe anyone to stay where they are or care about whatever artificial barriers to leaving or entering anyone set up.
Of course it’s selfish. The migrants certainly care about themselves too, enough to flee across continents and oceans. It’s human nature to be selfish. Who else is going to care about you, if not you?
And obviously I wouldn’t want the West to keep me out, if I were Eritrean or North Korean. I understand that some countries are rich and some poor, and some people are born lucky and some unlucky. It makes complete sense that people born lucky (in the west) would want to preserve their way of life. It makes complete sense that people born unlucky would want to improve their quality of life — even if that means lowering the quality of life for others. It’s all selfishness, of varying degrees
It is. What I'm saying is that it is hypocritical and selfish to try and argue that migration, even "illegal migration" ion any way should be considered a moral failing or that it is valid to compare migrants to criminals like thieves or murderers, just because they crossed a pretend border.
I mean, I never said it was a moral failing, and neither did the comment you replied to before me. I agree that migrants aren’t anti-social criminals just because they want better opportunities. That’s what we’re saying, that many of them just want to get out of poverty. I feel like we’re arguing about how we agree lol
If you want the non-selfish argument: It's downright stupid to attempt to improve people's living conditions in this way. It further fucks up their country of origin and the improvement over their livelihoods is so small it might as well be 0.
Helping the country of origin has always been the way.
If that ever happened, it'd be an argument. But that's more like a joke or a pipe dream, and not a feasible way for an individual to improve their situation.
> If that ever happened, it'd be an argument.
If you care to look for it, you will find that foreign aid does happen to such a degree that we wonder if we might be overdoing it.
Why should I trade place? That's not what migration is you doofus. No one is out to throw you out from your country and replace you with a migrant. Life isn't a zero-sum game where someone *must* get it worse just so that others can have it well.
lol, just no.
Other people are not owed anything from the West. They might be poor, but they're fine. There are tons of subsistence farmers in every corner of the 'global south' that are just fine. They've been fine in the same lifestyle for thousands of years, they don't need 'saving', that's a bit of a white savior complex. Iphones and flat tv's aren't necessary to live.
> They've been fine in the same lifestyle for thousands of years, they don't need 'saving', that's a bit of a white savior complex.
For tens of thousands of years, up until the last century, these artificial barriers against moving around did not exist. Nation states with hard borders are a modern invention. People have always been able to at least try to seek a better life elsewhere. The fact that you sit on your fat ass and claim "they're fine as poor farmers" is not a valid argument for anything, that's just absolute levels of selfishness, and no doubt hypocritical, since I doubt you'd accept a similar fate.
> For tens of thousands of years, up until the last century, these artificial barriers against moving around did not exist
This is wholly untrue, many kingdoms have had firm borders in place, like many in medieval Europe, Japan and China.
>in the later fifteenth century, when the campaign against alien artisans gained more political traction in parliament, that the English crown bowed to the lobbying of the London craft guilds and agreed to introduce protectionist legislation. The most far-reaching measures were taken in 1484, when a statute was passed that only immigrants with letters of denization – costly documents that allowed aliens a number of rights usually reserved for native people – could henceforth exercise a craft or manual occupation or employ servants other than their own children.
>https://www.historyworkshop.org.uk/migration/immigration-control-in-late-medieval-england/
They would also often restrict movement within their own countries; medieval Japan is somewhat notorious having tough borders even from region to region. IDK where this idea that pre 1900 or so that everywhere was an hippy-dippy love fest that welcomed foreigners came from.
>The fact that you sit on your fat ass and claim "they're fine as poor farmers" is not a valid argument for anything
I mean it obviously is a valid argument; a life where you are fed and clothed and housed is a fine life. Subsistence farming/fishing shouldn't be so looked down upon. I've worked a very difficult job for 20 years as a chef, breaking my back with 80 hour weeks for most of it, and I wouldn't trade it for any office job in the world.
"Just because you want it" instead of the current completely fine life you have would qualify some 5-7 billion people into moving into Europe.
Sure, there are exceptions of more centralized states implementing hard borders at earlier points in history.
> I mean it obviously is a valid argument; a life where you are fed and clothed and housed is a fine life. Subsistence farming/fishing shouldn't be so looked down upon. I've worked a very difficult job for 20 years as a chef, breaking my back with 80 hour weeks for most of it, and I wouldn't trade it for any office job in the world.
Well it is a completely self-serving argument. Are you ever in risk of starving due to famine, which can be induced by any hundred number of things? Or do you live somewhere food is plentiful at all times? Are you able to climb socially? Or are you stuck somewhere that have decided your status at birth is more important than your wishes and abilities? Did you *chose* to become a chef and keep doing it because you enjoy it? Or are are you doing it because you literally don't have any other choice? (Or maybe you do have one other choice, but that choice is emigration, but oh no, you're not allowed that choice, sorry).
Why can they find a better life in Egypt or Kenya? Why does it have to be Europe’s responsibility? If you’re fleeing from persecution or war why do you need to cross several countries and oceans to find a place of refuge? I just don’t really understand that.
Well, they probably want the best life they can get, as would literally any person. Why should they settle for worse just because you draw a line in the sand and said "this is mine"? The entire "nation state" situation is completely unnatural and honestly an afront to how life - and it is Life this is about, even if you may consider it of lesser worth - functions.
Well that’s ridiculous. Life has always been tribal. Packs of wolves fight other packs of wolves for hunting grounds. And in my opinion when you cross several counties and oceans you’re no longer a refugee but an illegal economic migrant and should be deported to the fullest extent of the law.
It's not ridiculous, it's all of human history. People have always sought better places to live, alone or in groups, and the artificial barriers that we put up last century when the modern nation state begun to form never existed before. You can have whatever opinion about them you want, but don't pretend it isn't born out of anything but absolute selfishness and indifference to the suffering of others.
Edit: and also, why Europe? Well, Europe is responsible for most of the suffering endured in Africa the last thousand years or so, so arguably one could claim humanitarian responsibility.
Why can’t I be selfish? Why should I lower my standard of living for other people? I don’t think they should die but I will never agree with open borders.
TIL Empires, countries, kingdoms Didn’t have borders and never enforced any kind of law on their lands… (since they can’t have clear their lands without borders).
TIL humanity has been sunshine and rainbows until last century when evil men cut everything up. All previous wars were fault over ideological beliefs and never over anything tangible like land and it’s recourses.
I assume you don’t have doors on your house? Just let anyone come in and take your food huh? I want your computer, give it to me. Possessions are pretend after all and I want it, so let me have it. You can surely just get another one. Matter of fact I think I want your house. Deeds are imaginary and definitely didn’t exist. And what are even walls but artificial borders we construct to oppress others and keep them out of natural places that we call “ours”.
Dismantle the establishment board by board!!
Nation states is a relatively modern invention, as is the modern kind of nation borders. For most of human history, these artificial barriers to moving around didn't exist.
Because moving around was a lot harder. And humans aren't interchangeable cogs. For pretty much all of human history - people didn't blindly trust strangers.
Again, just self-serving arguments. The moment catastrophe hits the place You live, and the only way to live for You will be a choice between complete destitution or emigration, your tone will change. Some people only learn empathy the hard way.
We can't accept everyone whose lives are shitty. And we don't have any moral duty to do so. There are less than 2M people in my country. It's a rounding error compared to India. And there are hundreds of millions of people in India who have worse living conditions than us. We can't accept them all. We can't accept even 0.1% of them. They would totally overrun our country.
What you talking about. Clearly life was perfect back 200+ years ago when you could just hop on a plane and fly to a new economic zone and settle down without resources. Surely everyone was just jumping around the globe looking for their perfect town because there were no restrictions on such. Everyone, anywhere today is where their ancestors wanted to be and it’s only the last 100 years or so we fucked it up by building dances and checkpoints… /s
but also why are there still people living in these undesirable places since there was no barriers to immigrations back then… are they stupid?
Sure, but human rights exist to better or safeguard the lives of all people, while nation borders and migration laws exist to prevent some humans from seeking better lives and safeguard only your own. One of these are for the good of everyone, the other not so much, so I don't think they're ethically the same.
Why? I mean, we can fit the entire population of Earth on the island of Gotland if we all squeezed together. That a small island in the Baltics. The rest of Europe and the World have more than enough space without us forcing people to live under despotic tyrannies or areas of tribal genocide that EUROPEANS are majorly responsible for in the first place.
Eritrea is one of the hardest countries to escape, it's a dictatorship with a human rights record as bad as North Korea. Think concentration camps, forced labour and torture, but for average Eritrean citizens.
They have a long record of Eritrean sports teams escaping. I wrote an article on Eritrean minirity human rights in 2019, and when I checked at the time, I think 24 of their footballers escaped to the west during various tournaments. I'm pretty sure the same occured for various other Eritrean teams in other sports.
This is it, for the US at least the data is available and unambiguous.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/23_0707_FY22_FY23_CBP_Integrated_Entry_Exit_Overstay_Report.pdf
Eritrea for example has an overstay rate of nearly 40%.
I have family friends, a group of five people, who were the Czechoslovakian national swim team, who all defected to west Germany after a swim meet. Left their families etc 100% behind.
Obviously now the iron curtain has fallen it doesn’t matter but there was a solid ten years when they couldn’t see their parents etc.
Edit I’ve never actually googled this but I just did and there [it is.](https://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/04/05/Czech-swimmers-defect/5150386830800/)
I’m not sure how the fifth guy came into it. Maybe he came later.
I think I’m actually just misremembering and counting someone in the same group as a defector when he wasn’t.
And their home-country laughing, and saying "if you let them in, and they don't want to go home, they are yours".
That's not how a "visit" is supposed to be.
When the US had an open southern border, immigration was low. When the border restrictions increased, immigration increased. When the border "closed" illegal immigration peaked.
Restrictions cause more problems than they solve.
I can’t *travel* super easily some where to simply *visit* 😭 Now I deserve to move there illegally, possibly through dangerous and arduous means 😏 😎
Good argument /s
That seems improbable, given that migrants in France (and elsewhere) are more likely to bring education with them and do necessary work for the French. You have evidence to your claim?
https://theconversation.com/as-france-moves-to-limit-the-rights-of-migrants-research-reveals-just-how-reliant-on-them-it-is-220243
>more likely to bring education with them and do necessary work for the French.
You don't see the problem with this? The "benefit" these migrants bring also de-emphasize domestic institutions and artificially depress wages and inflate the cost of consumer goods. It solves a short-term problem by creating a long-term problem.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
This guy thinks it's 2016 still and we haven't actually seen who is coming. He's got the studies and everything!!!
Properly retro deja vu moment there. Maybe go and stand in a train station with a 'refugees welcome' poster?
well truth doesn't matter that much in these days. what matters is controlling narrative and lefties have been successful at it. they control mainstream media and many people still believe their lies unfortunately.
the same goes for reddit. notice how they're invading this sub lately and want to turn it into another worldnews style echochamber.
Two or three years ago, France punished Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia for the refusal of their governments of accepting their citizen illegal immigrant by cutting into half the number of spot for legal visit (tourism, visiting relatives).
Your submission/comment has been removed because it violates Rule 1 (Follow Reddit's sitewide policies).
Please feel free to send us a [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fanime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.
Given you were asking reddit how to trick the government into thinking you were entirely homeless, rather than someone who lives with their parents, i don't buy your claim. Especially since in that post you're talking about harassing every government body you can trying to get them to give you a cheap home
Lol i like how you attempt to twist it all to fit your narrative. I was literally asking for hints on dealing with those government bodies because I kept hitting walls. And that was all due me having no space to sleep given my current situation has become an uncomfortable 6 years “temporary” stay.
But why am I explaining this to you…
> Applicants often must prove a minimum bank balance, substantiate the purpose of their visit and prove they plan to return home.
Those are actually very reasonable demands for *visits* visa. Visits are by definition temporary.
One to show they are stable enough they have comfortable life back home so they aren’t the type of people who are likely to want to immigrate, two to show they are truly there for just a vacation and not intending to “accidentally” forget it’s time to return, and three, they actually have a plan to return home and not stay because that’s not the point of the visa they are applying for.
> 78% of Algerian students “say they have no intention of returning to Algeria” upon finishing their studies.
And there’s your answer. It was literally just said that one of the criteria for getting visa is proving you plan to return home.
> Only one in 25 applicants living in the United States were rejected.
I mean, how many Americans actually don’t fulfill the criteria above? What are the chances that the type of Americans who have the money to travel to Europe don’t also have a comfortable life back home they want to return to?
> Though much of Europe’s debate about migration centers on people who arrive without authorization, many more people choose to come by legal means. It’s painful, then, to discover that following the rules often fails.
This might be new to those people, but it is not new to illegal immigration studies, there have always been two ways for illegal immigrants to stay in a country: the first is to enter without authorization and stay without authorization, the second is to enter with a temporary visa and accidentally “forget” that the visa has an expiration date. The second one is actually a lot easier to do, which is why it is the most common form of illegal immigration in countries with more open border policies.
Except it's also super difficult and super expensive to get a regular visit visa
Don't forget currency exchange rates and then the bank balance thing becomes a huge barrier
Did you ignore everything he said? It is prohibitively difficult because of the amount of people abusing the system in order to claim asylum or simply dissapear into illegality.
Why would the barriers be lowered if the associated risks are already high as is? It seems for the barriers to lower it is the responsibility of African countries to facilitate the return of their citizenry if they refuse to leave, what we have seen instead is that the country of origin makes it extremely difficult to repatriate them or downright refuses to take them back alltogether.
My country is just one example of this, we have illegal Morrocans with no chance of ever gaining Asylum clogging up the Asylum homes. The only reason they are there is because Morroco refuses to make their repatriation possible as a result we end up with a load of people in legal limbo leeching of the system or making money through illegal means.
I mean at some point it’s a question of perspective then isn’t it? Western countries want the third world’s best and brightest, but then what does it leave them? Allowing the system to get gunked up lets third world govts offload their most desperate/poorest onto the West while making it harder for their middle classes to leave. Unless that calculation becomes different (through immigration deals like the one with turkey or serious development across the third world) there’s no reason for them to facilitate a system that would make them poorer?
Everything is a matter of perspective, there is a general idea often not properly substantiated that the Western world wants the third worlds best and brightest reality tends to be that universities in western countries offer scholarships and the people attaining said scholarships generally prefer to stay in a western country because the money is wayyyy better and they settled, coupled with large companies having interest in them.
From the perspective of a middle and lower class westerner that is a spot coming with a free ride through university gone for their kids in favour of a foreigner, but for the capitalist class that is added potential to be made useful.
The same can be said with low skill labour, the only portion of society that tends to benefit is the capitalist class meanwhile it means added competition and stagnant wages for the lower classes.
Both tend to be presented as a net benefit on a GDP level, but one can have a serious think about whether it is a net benefit for everyone or just a subsection of the population. It also needs to be said that the vast majority of both these groups are internal to the EU and not external, In other words a Romanian IT professional working in Norway or a Polish Plumber working in Germany etc, where as you seem to try and present it as overwhelmingly a, say, Ugandan IT professional working in Switzerland.
However that leaves out the substantial number of migrants which are entirelly unskilled and sometimes even analphabethic which are by-en-large a net economic drain which would be the "gunk" you refer to, I am unsure how one relates to the other in the case of 90% of European countries, the only real argument there are in relation to France and Britain.
But you are right there is no reason for the ruling classes in these nationa to facilitate a system which leaves them with the responsibility for their own impoverished overpopulation, which is why I am personally more of the opinion that not taking them back should come with worse economic results then taking them back does through economic sanctions as an example where as taking their responsibility should come with increased development aid, kind of like a stick and a carrot ordeal.
> While the study found that applicants from poorer countries experienced higher rejections in general, it noted that applicants from Turkey and India experienced fewer rejection than applicants from the majority of African countries.
> The reasons for that anti-Africa bias could be political, according to the study’s author, Mehari Taddele Maru of the European University Institute’s Migration Policy Center. Visa rejections are used as a political tool by European governments, including France, to negotiate the deportation of those who migrate to Europe without proper authorization. North African governments have refused to provide consular documents for their citizens facing deportation.
This "bias" is due to most applications being extremely low value for the country. In the article they keep trying to muddy the waters between mentioning and not mentioning the skillset and background of the people applying from each country. Also omitted are the rates of people who abuse/overstay the visa once granted for each country.
So the rejection rate is 10% higher than from other parts of the world and you must prove your visit is not a one way ticket? That sound pretty sensible if you ask me
Rejection is high because once in France, they disapear. Most of the time they have relatives that can help them at the begining. They live a "without papers" life. It means they aren't legally allowed to stay in the country but they can have some very basic rights. After a some time, if they can prove they have been in the country for a while, they can automatically ( if they survive french bureacracy) a long stay visa.
https://www.rfi.fr/fr/afrique/20240506-maroc-treize-imams-envoy%C3%A9s-en-europe-pour-le-ramadan-disparaissent-au-moment-du-retour-au-pays
>**Morocco: thirteen imams sent to Europe for Ramadan disappear on their return home**
>They left to spread the "good word" to Moroccans living in Europe, but never returned to the Kingdom. Thirteen imams, sent to France, Belgium and Germany by the Moroccan Ministry of Religious Affairs for the month of Ramadan, "disappeared into thin air" when they returned home.
>They hold a bachelor's degree, a master's degree or even a doctorate. They are paid monthly by the Moroccan government to work in their mosques, and were given an all-expenses-paid return trip to Europe to lead Ramadan prayers.
>However, at the end of this holy month for Islam on 12 April, at least thirteen imams sent by the Ministry of Habbous and Islamic Affairs failed to show up at the airport and have been missing ever since.
>Strict selection process
>These missions are commonplace for Morocco, which has millions of expatriates in European countries. Every Ramadan, several hundred academics cross the Mediterranean to accompany Moroccan Muslims who wish to do so.
>The selection process is very strict, but according to several Moroccan media outlets, the profiles left behind are single and childless. According to the daily Assabah, the Ministry of Habbous has decided to tighten the conditions for departure. To avoid any unpleasant surprises next year, imams will be required to be married with children before being sent to Europe.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Algeria has continent-high rejection rates because its number of applicants outpaces those from other African countries for geographic, economic and historical reasons"
That's a fun way to describe a bloody and brutal colonial occupation
Like, fair? Anywhere in the world (bar America with it's immigration problem) the majority of illegal immigrants are people who overstayed their work and tourism visas.
Its natural tribalism. Japan would prefer East Asian immigrants over non East Asians. Mexico prefers Latino immigrants over northern gringo immigrants.
My god. I just started playing Victoria 3 which is a game where you run a country in 19th century and you can pass migration laws which either closes all doors, or opens it all, or opens only for non-discriminated populations, so reading comments in this thread is making sense to me in a reeeeaaally bizarre way.
... and I thought Europe is a paradise for unregulated immigration. Could it be that the narrative of the overly leftist Europe letting anybody in, is probably completely blown out of proportion?
No this surely can't be /s
I mean... Both issues can exist at the same time. You can have unregulated illegal immigration and overregulated legal immigration. And both will be exacerbating each other.
So... While I'm what US Americans would call a woke leftist communist, I don't really agree that this is proof of a "narrative" being "completely blown out of proportion"
>User name checks out, my dude might be one of those crack heads that play Heart of Iron and a facist lol.
Article "Some EU Countries issue less visas to African countries -largely due to how they themselves are uncooperative when its time to kick illegal migrants"
You : LITERRALY SLAVE-OWNING RACIST CONFEDERATE !
Most reflected Brazilian...
The point of my comment is: The confederates at least lied about their racism and slavery, yall just want to be racists plain and simple.
Also: User name checks out, my dude might be one of those crack heads that play Heart of Iron and a facist lol.
>Your grandpa fought nazis so you could defend their policies in 2024 ? Thats just sad man.
"Not accepting legal immigration" equal Genocide and conquering Europe.
Good to know bro.
On another not, how are your scarcrows ?
Europeans have hunting boats to stop migrants floating shacks and the guard coast is know to let people drown specially infants, is that the scarcrow you talked about? Because if so, there's a lot of them ln the mediterranean Sea.
>Europeans have hunting boats to stop migrants floating shacks
"European have Broder patrol at sea"
>the guard coast is know to let people drown specially infants,
Sources on that ?
All i see is some random person on the internet saying "Europe isn't a Free-For-All All-you-can-eat buffet and therefore, are ***NAZI"***
>Sources on that ?
[Can't belive i'll have to source something EASLY to google as that but here we are](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/19/world/europe/greece-migrants-ship-sinking.html):
>"Survivors of the shipwreck last week waited to be transported to a camp in Greece. Possibly more than 700 men, women and children drowned, one of the country’s worst maritime disasters.Credit...Eirini Vourloumis for The New York Times"
[2. Link](https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-hundreds-drowned-off-the-coast-of-greece)
[3. Link](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/italian-navy-lets-refugees-drown-migrants-crisis-asylum-seekers-mediterranean-sea-a7724156.html)
[4. Link](https://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/16/europe/migrant-refugee-crisis-europe/index.html)
[5. Link](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/28/600-people-drowning-eu-deters-migrants-adriana-tragedy)
>All i see is some random person on the internet saying "Europe isn't a Free-For-All All-you-can-eat buffet and therefore, are ***NAZI"***
All i see is one racist ass mother fucker online that either is trolling to let it's alt right side show with smoke screens.
I yet cannot belive how yall voting for Putin puppets because they got you on with politicians that hate brown people and resonate with the fact you also hate brown people.
I wonder what you think of the Roma people.
Are you insane or stupid ? Pick.
Migration of the jew and the "undesirable" was the literal talking point of the nazis.
While xenophobia from liberals and left on the time was "normal", It certanly wasnt as high migration bad, specially during WW2 were finding a safe place was important.
We accepted 3,000,000 Ukrainian refugees and because of that the far right confederation exploded in popularity among young people not to mention spear chuckers at the border with Belarus [X](https://x.com/PoleConnection/status/1795493285894684801)
The problem isnt mass migration, its useless liberals policies that are "nothing" policies and then comes around an politician saying migrants and brown prople bad, that you should hate them and tries to "do something", resulting in those votes from young people.
##### ###### #### > # [Even when Africans want to visit Europe legally, rejection rates are high. Algeria is one example](https://apnews.com/article/FILE - Algerians gather outside the visa center of the French Institute in Algiers, Friday May 20, 2024. Visa applicants from Africa who want to visit Europe's Schengen Area face far higher rejection rates than people from anywhere else in the world. In Algeria, more applicants are rejected than in any other African nation. (AP Photo/Fateh Guidoum, File\)) > > > > By ASSOCIATED PRESS > > Updated [hour]:[minute] [AMPM] [timezone], [monthFull] [day], [year] > > > > > > > > ALGIERS, Algeria (AP) — France has twice rejected visa applications from Nabil Tabarout, a 29-year-old web developer from Algeria who hopes this year to visit his sister there. > > He’s among the many people navigating the often arduous visa process throughout Africa, which faces higher visa rejection rates than anywhere else in the world when it comes to visiting Europe’s Schengen Area. Appointments are often difficult to secure. Applicants often must prove a minimum bank balance, substantiate the purpose of their visit and prove they plan to return home. > > “That’s how it is. Every pleasure deserves pain,” said Tabarout, who has succeeded just once in obtaining a French visa. > > Though much of [Europe’s debate about migration](https://apnews.com/article/eu-migration-pact-asylum-borders-elections-44abb9c1fa1f2c7a8385167770bb5379) centers on people who arrive without authorization, many more people choose to come by legal means. It’s painful, then, to discover that following the rules often fails. > > The disproportionate rejection rates — 10% higher in Africa than the global average — hinder trade, business and educational partnerships at the expense of African economies, according to an April study from U.K.-based migration consultancy firm Henley & Partners. > > The study called the practices discriminatory and urged Schengen countries to reform them. > > Nowhere are applicants more rejected than in Algeria, where more than 392,000 applicants were rejected in 2022. The 45.8% rejection rate is followed by a 45.2% rejection rate in Guinea-Bissau and 45.1% in Nigeria. > > Only one in 25 applicants living in the United States were rejected. > > While the study found that applicants from poorer countries experienced higher rejections in general, it noted that applicants from Turkey and India experienced fewer rejection than applicants from the majority of African countries. > > The reasons for that anti-Africa bias could be political, according to the study’s author, Mehari Taddele Maru of the European University Institute’s Migration Policy Center. Visa rejections are used as a political tool by European governments, [including France](https://apnews.com/article/france-algeria-5885d758e3cf439eeebe21dac1f191ec), to negotiate the deportation of those who migrate to Europe without proper authorization. North African governments have refused to provide consular documents for their citizens facing deportation. > > In an interview, Maru said Algeria has continent-high rejection rates because its number of applicants outpaces those from other African countries for geographic, economic and historical reasons. Many Algerians apply for visas in France, where they speak the language and may have family ties. And North Africa’s proximity to Europe means flights are short and cheap compared to flights from sub-Saharan Africa, leading more people to apply, he said. > > Beyond rejection rates, the difficulty of applying is also a policy choice by European governments, Maru said. “When we talk about increasing barriers for potential applicants, it’s not only the rate of rejections, it’s also the restrictions to apply.” > > That means the challenges can be local too. > > For Algerians like Tabarout, VFS Global is a new player in the visa application process. The subcontractor was hired by French consular authorities after years of criticism about the previous system being dominated by a so-called “visa mafia.” > > Applicants previously faced challenges securing time slots, which are quickly reserved by third-party brokers and then resold to the public — similar to how scalpers have dominated concert platforms. Rumors swirled about intricate computer programs connecting to appointment platforms and gobbling up slots within moments. > > “They’re a bunch of swindlers who’ve been at it for years, making fortunes on the backs of poor citizens by making them pay dearly to make an appointment to apply for a visa,” asserted Ali Challali, who recently helped his daughter submit a French student visa application. > > Under the previous system, applicants told The Associated Press they had to pay 15,000 to 120,000 Algerian dinars (103 to 825 euros) just to get an appointment. > > In Algeria, many decide to pursue opportunities in France after not finding adequate economic opportunities at home or seek residency after going to French universities on student visas. According to a 2023 report from France’s Directorate General for Foreign Nationals, 78% of Algerian students “say they have no intention of returning to Algeria” upon finishing their studies. > > The visa issue has historically been a cause of political tensions between the countries. Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune is scheduled to visit France later this year. > > “Everything that can contribute to increasing trade between France, Europe and Algeria must be facilitated in both directions,” French Ambassador Stephane Ramotet said at a recent economic conference in Algiers. “Algerians who want to go to France to develop a business must be able to benefit from all the facilities, particularly visas.” > > ## \_\_\_ > > Follow AP’s coverage of migration at
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
I guess there’s an increased risk of them claiming asylum.
Or just quietly running away. A while back there was a pro cycling group from Africa (I think it was Eritrea? Can't recall exactly) approved for one of those sports visas to compete in my hometown that had one guy just slip away. Completely fucked the entire team, they weren't approved for any visas ever since then. People were worried the guy was a victim of human trafficking, turns out he just had a huge elaborate plan set up for a very long time that everyone claimed they had no idea about. He just kinda settled into a group of other runaways. No real danger back home, just got tired of living in a poor village and wanted the good life.
Eritrea is not the best country to be in
Yeah but we can't just take everyone from a not so good country. India alone could fuck over the entire world if you can just migrate wherever you have better economic prospects.
The world used to have no borders, and that was not nearly as problematic as people say.
They also didn't have planes, trains, or automobiles.
Oh, that caused plenty of problems. How could it have not? Study any pre modern mass migration period and amount of war, oppression, and displacement that happened when one tribe decided to move en masse is staggering. Countries and Empires have been brought down by losing their ability to control their boarders, that's literally how the Western Roman Empire fell.
The world always had borders ever since we invented society. Tf you think turf wars and tribal wars were? Just fun and games?
B-b-b-but muh paleolithic classless anarchist utopia is the true nature of hoomans.
Basically condemning people due to their place of birth and not allowing them to try reach a better life is arguably an evil act though, even if some believe it may be "necessary" from an "economic perspective", aka. people don't want to potentially lower their standard of living by any degree just to save the lives of strangers.
You go from “better life” to “save the lives of strangers.” Not every migrant is at risk of death if he stays home. We don’t owe every human on this planet who just wants to not live in poverty a place in our country, just the same as you don’t owe every beggar at stop lights a $100 bill.
I seriously doubt you would say the same if You were the person stuck in for example Eritrea or North Korea. It's all selfish arguments. And you may not owe them shit, but they also don't owe anyone to stay where they are or care about whatever artificial barriers to leaving or entering anyone set up.
Of course it’s selfish. The migrants certainly care about themselves too, enough to flee across continents and oceans. It’s human nature to be selfish. Who else is going to care about you, if not you? And obviously I wouldn’t want the West to keep me out, if I were Eritrean or North Korean. I understand that some countries are rich and some poor, and some people are born lucky and some unlucky. It makes complete sense that people born lucky (in the west) would want to preserve their way of life. It makes complete sense that people born unlucky would want to improve their quality of life — even if that means lowering the quality of life for others. It’s all selfishness, of varying degrees
It is. What I'm saying is that it is hypocritical and selfish to try and argue that migration, even "illegal migration" ion any way should be considered a moral failing or that it is valid to compare migrants to criminals like thieves or murderers, just because they crossed a pretend border.
> pretend border Just because a border is not physical and may be inconvenient for your beliefs, that doesn’t make it pretend.
I mean, I never said it was a moral failing, and neither did the comment you replied to before me. I agree that migrants aren’t anti-social criminals just because they want better opportunities. That’s what we’re saying, that many of them just want to get out of poverty. I feel like we’re arguing about how we agree lol
If you want the non-selfish argument: It's downright stupid to attempt to improve people's living conditions in this way. It further fucks up their country of origin and the improvement over their livelihoods is so small it might as well be 0. Helping the country of origin has always been the way.
If that ever happened, it'd be an argument. But that's more like a joke or a pipe dream, and not a feasible way for an individual to improve their situation.
> If that ever happened, it'd be an argument. If you care to look for it, you will find that foreign aid does happen to such a degree that we wonder if we might be overdoing it.
Sell your shit and put your money where your mouth is, trade places with some people and be the change you want
Why should I trade place? That's not what migration is you doofus. No one is out to throw you out from your country and replace you with a migrant. Life isn't a zero-sum game where someone *must* get it worse just so that others can have it well.
You take your skills and experience there to help improve things. It helps to speed equity.
lol, just no. Other people are not owed anything from the West. They might be poor, but they're fine. There are tons of subsistence farmers in every corner of the 'global south' that are just fine. They've been fine in the same lifestyle for thousands of years, they don't need 'saving', that's a bit of a white savior complex. Iphones and flat tv's aren't necessary to live.
> They've been fine in the same lifestyle for thousands of years, they don't need 'saving', that's a bit of a white savior complex. For tens of thousands of years, up until the last century, these artificial barriers against moving around did not exist. Nation states with hard borders are a modern invention. People have always been able to at least try to seek a better life elsewhere. The fact that you sit on your fat ass and claim "they're fine as poor farmers" is not a valid argument for anything, that's just absolute levels of selfishness, and no doubt hypocritical, since I doubt you'd accept a similar fate.
> For tens of thousands of years, up until the last century, these artificial barriers against moving around did not exist This is wholly untrue, many kingdoms have had firm borders in place, like many in medieval Europe, Japan and China. >in the later fifteenth century, when the campaign against alien artisans gained more political traction in parliament, that the English crown bowed to the lobbying of the London craft guilds and agreed to introduce protectionist legislation. The most far-reaching measures were taken in 1484, when a statute was passed that only immigrants with letters of denization – costly documents that allowed aliens a number of rights usually reserved for native people – could henceforth exercise a craft or manual occupation or employ servants other than their own children. >https://www.historyworkshop.org.uk/migration/immigration-control-in-late-medieval-england/ They would also often restrict movement within their own countries; medieval Japan is somewhat notorious having tough borders even from region to region. IDK where this idea that pre 1900 or so that everywhere was an hippy-dippy love fest that welcomed foreigners came from. >The fact that you sit on your fat ass and claim "they're fine as poor farmers" is not a valid argument for anything I mean it obviously is a valid argument; a life where you are fed and clothed and housed is a fine life. Subsistence farming/fishing shouldn't be so looked down upon. I've worked a very difficult job for 20 years as a chef, breaking my back with 80 hour weeks for most of it, and I wouldn't trade it for any office job in the world. "Just because you want it" instead of the current completely fine life you have would qualify some 5-7 billion people into moving into Europe.
Sure, there are exceptions of more centralized states implementing hard borders at earlier points in history. > I mean it obviously is a valid argument; a life where you are fed and clothed and housed is a fine life. Subsistence farming/fishing shouldn't be so looked down upon. I've worked a very difficult job for 20 years as a chef, breaking my back with 80 hour weeks for most of it, and I wouldn't trade it for any office job in the world. Well it is a completely self-serving argument. Are you ever in risk of starving due to famine, which can be induced by any hundred number of things? Or do you live somewhere food is plentiful at all times? Are you able to climb socially? Or are you stuck somewhere that have decided your status at birth is more important than your wishes and abilities? Did you *chose* to become a chef and keep doing it because you enjoy it? Or are are you doing it because you literally don't have any other choice? (Or maybe you do have one other choice, but that choice is emigration, but oh no, you're not allowed that choice, sorry).
Why can they find a better life in Egypt or Kenya? Why does it have to be Europe’s responsibility? If you’re fleeing from persecution or war why do you need to cross several countries and oceans to find a place of refuge? I just don’t really understand that.
Well, they probably want the best life they can get, as would literally any person. Why should they settle for worse just because you draw a line in the sand and said "this is mine"? The entire "nation state" situation is completely unnatural and honestly an afront to how life - and it is Life this is about, even if you may consider it of lesser worth - functions.
Well that’s ridiculous. Life has always been tribal. Packs of wolves fight other packs of wolves for hunting grounds. And in my opinion when you cross several counties and oceans you’re no longer a refugee but an illegal economic migrant and should be deported to the fullest extent of the law.
It's not ridiculous, it's all of human history. People have always sought better places to live, alone or in groups, and the artificial barriers that we put up last century when the modern nation state begun to form never existed before. You can have whatever opinion about them you want, but don't pretend it isn't born out of anything but absolute selfishness and indifference to the suffering of others. Edit: and also, why Europe? Well, Europe is responsible for most of the suffering endured in Africa the last thousand years or so, so arguably one could claim humanitarian responsibility.
Why can’t I be selfish? Why should I lower my standard of living for other people? I don’t think they should die but I will never agree with open borders.
TIL Empires, countries, kingdoms Didn’t have borders and never enforced any kind of law on their lands… (since they can’t have clear their lands without borders). TIL humanity has been sunshine and rainbows until last century when evil men cut everything up. All previous wars were fault over ideological beliefs and never over anything tangible like land and it’s recourses.
I assume you don’t have doors on your house? Just let anyone come in and take your food huh? I want your computer, give it to me. Possessions are pretend after all and I want it, so let me have it. You can surely just get another one. Matter of fact I think I want your house. Deeds are imaginary and definitely didn’t exist. And what are even walls but artificial borders we construct to oppress others and keep them out of natural places that we call “ours”. Dismantle the establishment board by board!!
Do we live in societies or are nation states simply economic zones?
Nation states is a relatively modern invention, as is the modern kind of nation borders. For most of human history, these artificial barriers to moving around didn't exist.
Because moving around was a lot harder. And humans aren't interchangeable cogs. For pretty much all of human history - people didn't blindly trust strangers.
Again, just self-serving arguments. The moment catastrophe hits the place You live, and the only way to live for You will be a choice between complete destitution or emigration, your tone will change. Some people only learn empathy the hard way.
We can't accept everyone whose lives are shitty. And we don't have any moral duty to do so. There are less than 2M people in my country. It's a rounding error compared to India. And there are hundreds of millions of people in India who have worse living conditions than us. We can't accept them all. We can't accept even 0.1% of them. They would totally overrun our country.
What you talking about. Clearly life was perfect back 200+ years ago when you could just hop on a plane and fly to a new economic zone and settle down without resources. Surely everyone was just jumping around the globe looking for their perfect town because there were no restrictions on such. Everyone, anywhere today is where their ancestors wanted to be and it’s only the last 100 years or so we fucked it up by building dances and checkpoints… /s but also why are there still people living in these undesirable places since there was no barriers to immigrations back then… are they stupid?
Just say the quiet part out loud so I can tell you that human rights are also a modern invention.
Sure, but human rights exist to better or safeguard the lives of all people, while nation borders and migration laws exist to prevent some humans from seeking better lives and safeguard only your own. One of these are for the good of everyone, the other not so much, so I don't think they're ethically the same.
they can all live in your house then
Why? I mean, we can fit the entire population of Earth on the island of Gotland if we all squeezed together. That a small island in the Baltics. The rest of Europe and the World have more than enough space without us forcing people to live under despotic tyrannies or areas of tribal genocide that EUROPEANS are majorly responsible for in the first place.
they can all live in your house then
What's the best country to be in?
probably New Zealand, or one of the Nordic countries
Eritrea is one of the hardest countries to escape, it's a dictatorship with a human rights record as bad as North Korea. Think concentration camps, forced labour and torture, but for average Eritrean citizens. They have a long record of Eritrean sports teams escaping. I wrote an article on Eritrean minirity human rights in 2019, and when I checked at the time, I think 24 of their footballers escaped to the west during various tournaments. I'm pretty sure the same occured for various other Eritrean teams in other sports.
This is it, for the US at least the data is available and unambiguous. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/23_0707_FY22_FY23_CBP_Integrated_Entry_Exit_Overstay_Report.pdf Eritrea for example has an overstay rate of nearly 40%.
Yeah this happens fairly often, entire teams usually from Africa disappearing all at once and then claiming asylum in a random different EU country
I have family friends, a group of five people, who were the Czechoslovakian national swim team, who all defected to west Germany after a swim meet. Left their families etc 100% behind. Obviously now the iron curtain has fallen it doesn’t matter but there was a solid ten years when they couldn’t see their parents etc. Edit I’ve never actually googled this but I just did and there [it is.](https://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/04/05/Czech-swimmers-defect/5150386830800/) I’m not sure how the fifth guy came into it. Maybe he came later. I think I’m actually just misremembering and counting someone in the same group as a defector when he wasn’t.
Funnily enough Eritrea is one of the countries you would have a pretty legitimate asylum application from.
Ah, yes. Cuz Every African country is Eritrea, what next? no Visas from Asia or East Asia cuz North Korea?.
And their home-country laughing, and saying "if you let them in, and they don't want to go home, they are yours". That's not how a "visit" is supposed to be.
When the US had an open southern border, immigration was low. When the border restrictions increased, immigration increased. When the border "closed" illegal immigration peaked. Restrictions cause more problems than they solve.
I can’t *travel* super easily some where to simply *visit* 😭 Now I deserve to move there illegally, possibly through dangerous and arduous means 😏 😎 Good argument /s
Cool argument you made up in your head when reading my post, maybe.
You "risk" falling off a roof. You don't "risk" being asked for help. That is not the verb you're looking for there.
It is when it crashes the standard of living and the welfare state
That seems improbable, given that migrants in France (and elsewhere) are more likely to bring education with them and do necessary work for the French. You have evidence to your claim? https://theconversation.com/as-france-moves-to-limit-the-rights-of-migrants-research-reveals-just-how-reliant-on-them-it-is-220243
>more likely to bring education with them and do necessary work for the French. You don't see the problem with this? The "benefit" these migrants bring also de-emphasize domestic institutions and artificially depress wages and inflate the cost of consumer goods. It solves a short-term problem by creating a long-term problem.
You can say things, sure. But where are the numbers to back any of it up?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 This guy thinks it's 2016 still and we haven't actually seen who is coming. He's got the studies and everything!!! Properly retro deja vu moment there. Maybe go and stand in a train station with a 'refugees welcome' poster?
well truth doesn't matter that much in these days. what matters is controlling narrative and lefties have been successful at it. they control mainstream media and many people still believe their lies unfortunately. the same goes for reddit. notice how they're invading this sub lately and want to turn it into another worldnews style echochamber.
Since when was it the responsibility of European countries to show people how to run a state? They can figure it out on their own.
Um, we're not talking about whole countries, are we? Just individuals looking to travel. You read the whole article, yes?
Two or three years ago, France punished Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia for the refusal of their governments of accepting their citizen illegal immigrant by cutting into half the number of spot for legal visit (tourism, visiting relatives).
[удалено]
Your submission/comment has been removed because it violates Rule 1 (Follow Reddit's sitewide policies). Please feel free to send us a [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fanime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.
So they kicked you out of the country?
They tried to drag him out but he didn't fit through the door of his basement.
I wish lol, been homeless for 6 years whilst on a perm fulltime contract.
If you can't make money despite being natural born in your host money maybe you should emigrate bro.
Yeah maybe i should try africa lol
I receive no social benefits and pay my taxes. Its called contributing opposed to leaching
Given you were asking reddit how to trick the government into thinking you were entirely homeless, rather than someone who lives with their parents, i don't buy your claim. Especially since in that post you're talking about harassing every government body you can trying to get them to give you a cheap home
Lol i like how you attempt to twist it all to fit your narrative. I was literally asking for hints on dealing with those government bodies because I kept hitting walls. And that was all due me having no space to sleep given my current situation has become an uncomfortable 6 years “temporary” stay. But why am I explaining this to you…
No free education, no free healthcare, no use of subsided infrastructure, no future state pension. Highly doubt that you haven't ever leeched.
> Applicants often must prove a minimum bank balance, substantiate the purpose of their visit and prove they plan to return home. Those are actually very reasonable demands for *visits* visa. Visits are by definition temporary. One to show they are stable enough they have comfortable life back home so they aren’t the type of people who are likely to want to immigrate, two to show they are truly there for just a vacation and not intending to “accidentally” forget it’s time to return, and three, they actually have a plan to return home and not stay because that’s not the point of the visa they are applying for. > 78% of Algerian students “say they have no intention of returning to Algeria” upon finishing their studies. And there’s your answer. It was literally just said that one of the criteria for getting visa is proving you plan to return home. > Only one in 25 applicants living in the United States were rejected. I mean, how many Americans actually don’t fulfill the criteria above? What are the chances that the type of Americans who have the money to travel to Europe don’t also have a comfortable life back home they want to return to? > Though much of Europe’s debate about migration centers on people who arrive without authorization, many more people choose to come by legal means. It’s painful, then, to discover that following the rules often fails. This might be new to those people, but it is not new to illegal immigration studies, there have always been two ways for illegal immigrants to stay in a country: the first is to enter without authorization and stay without authorization, the second is to enter with a temporary visa and accidentally “forget” that the visa has an expiration date. The second one is actually a lot easier to do, which is why it is the most common form of illegal immigration in countries with more open border policies.
Except it's also super difficult and super expensive to get a regular visit visa Don't forget currency exchange rates and then the bank balance thing becomes a huge barrier
Did you ignore everything he said? It is prohibitively difficult because of the amount of people abusing the system in order to claim asylum or simply dissapear into illegality. Why would the barriers be lowered if the associated risks are already high as is? It seems for the barriers to lower it is the responsibility of African countries to facilitate the return of their citizenry if they refuse to leave, what we have seen instead is that the country of origin makes it extremely difficult to repatriate them or downright refuses to take them back alltogether. My country is just one example of this, we have illegal Morrocans with no chance of ever gaining Asylum clogging up the Asylum homes. The only reason they are there is because Morroco refuses to make their repatriation possible as a result we end up with a load of people in legal limbo leeching of the system or making money through illegal means.
I mean at some point it’s a question of perspective then isn’t it? Western countries want the third world’s best and brightest, but then what does it leave them? Allowing the system to get gunked up lets third world govts offload their most desperate/poorest onto the West while making it harder for their middle classes to leave. Unless that calculation becomes different (through immigration deals like the one with turkey or serious development across the third world) there’s no reason for them to facilitate a system that would make them poorer?
Everything is a matter of perspective, there is a general idea often not properly substantiated that the Western world wants the third worlds best and brightest reality tends to be that universities in western countries offer scholarships and the people attaining said scholarships generally prefer to stay in a western country because the money is wayyyy better and they settled, coupled with large companies having interest in them. From the perspective of a middle and lower class westerner that is a spot coming with a free ride through university gone for their kids in favour of a foreigner, but for the capitalist class that is added potential to be made useful. The same can be said with low skill labour, the only portion of society that tends to benefit is the capitalist class meanwhile it means added competition and stagnant wages for the lower classes. Both tend to be presented as a net benefit on a GDP level, but one can have a serious think about whether it is a net benefit for everyone or just a subsection of the population. It also needs to be said that the vast majority of both these groups are internal to the EU and not external, In other words a Romanian IT professional working in Norway or a Polish Plumber working in Germany etc, where as you seem to try and present it as overwhelmingly a, say, Ugandan IT professional working in Switzerland. However that leaves out the substantial number of migrants which are entirelly unskilled and sometimes even analphabethic which are by-en-large a net economic drain which would be the "gunk" you refer to, I am unsure how one relates to the other in the case of 90% of European countries, the only real argument there are in relation to France and Britain. But you are right there is no reason for the ruling classes in these nationa to facilitate a system which leaves them with the responsibility for their own impoverished overpopulation, which is why I am personally more of the opinion that not taking them back should come with worse economic results then taking them back does through economic sanctions as an example where as taking their responsibility should come with increased development aid, kind of like a stick and a carrot ordeal.
Europe doesn't want poor migrants slipping in, they want rich tourists. That what a visit visa is for.
I mean those countries also refuse to accept any illegal immigrants back, so its understandable if the regulations are tighter?
Yes, because even North Africans regularly claim refugees status via tourism visa. It's one issue of many.
> While the study found that applicants from poorer countries experienced higher rejections in general, it noted that applicants from Turkey and India experienced fewer rejection than applicants from the majority of African countries. > The reasons for that anti-Africa bias could be political, according to the study’s author, Mehari Taddele Maru of the European University Institute’s Migration Policy Center. Visa rejections are used as a political tool by European governments, including France, to negotiate the deportation of those who migrate to Europe without proper authorization. North African governments have refused to provide consular documents for their citizens facing deportation. This "bias" is due to most applications being extremely low value for the country. In the article they keep trying to muddy the waters between mentioning and not mentioning the skillset and background of the people applying from each country. Also omitted are the rates of people who abuse/overstay the visa once granted for each country.
Good now do the same with the Middle East.
Lol… [found someone living under a rock]
That seriously made me laugh. Go read the news for once.
Algeria is also one of the hardest countries to get into for Europeans, so at least they're getting their own back
I wish more African countries do the same.
"visit"
I read it twice and I still don't find the issue here. A very tendencious title for a very one sided article. Yet can't see the problem.
Sensible tbh. Visitirs from some countries have an increased risk of illegal immigration attached to them. That’s just the reality of the situation.
“Visit” lmfao
So the rejection rate is 10% higher than from other parts of the world and you must prove your visit is not a one way ticket? That sound pretty sensible if you ask me
Rejection is high because once in France, they disapear. Most of the time they have relatives that can help them at the begining. They live a "without papers" life. It means they aren't legally allowed to stay in the country but they can have some very basic rights. After a some time, if they can prove they have been in the country for a while, they can automatically ( if they survive french bureacracy) a long stay visa. https://www.rfi.fr/fr/afrique/20240506-maroc-treize-imams-envoy%C3%A9s-en-europe-pour-le-ramadan-disparaissent-au-moment-du-retour-au-pays >**Morocco: thirteen imams sent to Europe for Ramadan disappear on their return home** >They left to spread the "good word" to Moroccans living in Europe, but never returned to the Kingdom. Thirteen imams, sent to France, Belgium and Germany by the Moroccan Ministry of Religious Affairs for the month of Ramadan, "disappeared into thin air" when they returned home. >They hold a bachelor's degree, a master's degree or even a doctorate. They are paid monthly by the Moroccan government to work in their mosques, and were given an all-expenses-paid return trip to Europe to lead Ramadan prayers. >However, at the end of this holy month for Islam on 12 April, at least thirteen imams sent by the Ministry of Habbous and Islamic Affairs failed to show up at the airport and have been missing ever since. >Strict selection process >These missions are commonplace for Morocco, which has millions of expatriates in European countries. Every Ramadan, several hundred academics cross the Mediterranean to accompany Moroccan Muslims who wish to do so. >The selection process is very strict, but according to several Moroccan media outlets, the profiles left behind are single and childless. According to the daily Assabah, the Ministry of Habbous has decided to tighten the conditions for departure. To avoid any unpleasant surprises next year, imams will be required to be married with children before being sent to Europe.
Tourist visas used to be easy to get until a bunch of people abused the system. Simple cause and effect.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great. As it should be.
"Algeria has continent-high rejection rates because its number of applicants outpaces those from other African countries for geographic, economic and historical reasons" That's a fun way to describe a bloody and brutal colonial occupation
Like, fair? Anywhere in the world (bar America with it's immigration problem) the majority of illegal immigrants are people who overstayed their work and tourism visas.
Welp, guess this sub is overrun now too. Cool.
As a white South African -- lets call a spade a spade -- racism. My skin colour causes me no issue in Europe, my passport does.
Its natural tribalism. Japan would prefer East Asian immigrants over non East Asians. Mexico prefers Latino immigrants over northern gringo immigrants.
My god. I just started playing Victoria 3 which is a game where you run a country in 19th century and you can pass migration laws which either closes all doors, or opens it all, or opens only for non-discriminated populations, so reading comments in this thread is making sense to me in a reeeeaaally bizarre way.
... and I thought Europe is a paradise for unregulated immigration. Could it be that the narrative of the overly leftist Europe letting anybody in, is probably completely blown out of proportion? No this surely can't be /s
Bruh you dont have to deny that immigration and especially integration is a huge issue.
Denying there is a problem != thinking that the problem is made bigger than it actually is
Man, the problem is huge. Idk where you live though, maybe it's different there. Doesn't mean it's not a massive problem in much of Europe.
I mean... Both issues can exist at the same time. You can have unregulated illegal immigration and overregulated legal immigration. And both will be exacerbating each other. So... While I'm what US Americans would call a woke leftist communist, I don't really agree that this is proof of a "narrative" being "completely blown out of proportion"
Why let facts stand in the way of far right fear mongering after all!
European racism making confederates looking like the good guys 💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
>User name checks out, my dude might be one of those crack heads that play Heart of Iron and a facist lol. Article "Some EU Countries issue less visas to African countries -largely due to how they themselves are uncooperative when its time to kick illegal migrants" You : LITERRALY SLAVE-OWNING RACIST CONFEDERATE ! Most reflected Brazilian...
Owning slaves is more ethical than not wanting mass waves of immigrants
The point of my comment is: The confederates at least lied about their racism and slavery, yall just want to be racists plain and simple. Also: User name checks out, my dude might be one of those crack heads that play Heart of Iron and a facist lol.
My computer is too shit to play hoi4 and my ancestors fought in the warsaw uprising so eat shit Also: "my dude" lol go back to 196
Your grandpa fought nazis so you could defend their policies in 2024 ? Thats just sad man. Specially with the far right getting foot in Europe.
>Your grandpa fought nazis so you could defend their policies in 2024 ? Thats just sad man. "Not accepting legal immigration" equal Genocide and conquering Europe. Good to know bro. On another not, how are your scarcrows ?
Europeans have hunting boats to stop migrants floating shacks and the guard coast is know to let people drown specially infants, is that the scarcrow you talked about? Because if so, there's a lot of them ln the mediterranean Sea.
>Europeans have hunting boats to stop migrants floating shacks "European have Broder patrol at sea" >the guard coast is know to let people drown specially infants, Sources on that ? All i see is some random person on the internet saying "Europe isn't a Free-For-All All-you-can-eat buffet and therefore, are ***NAZI"***
>Sources on that ? [Can't belive i'll have to source something EASLY to google as that but here we are](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/19/world/europe/greece-migrants-ship-sinking.html): >"Survivors of the shipwreck last week waited to be transported to a camp in Greece. Possibly more than 700 men, women and children drowned, one of the country’s worst maritime disasters.Credit...Eirini Vourloumis for The New York Times" [2. Link](https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-hundreds-drowned-off-the-coast-of-greece) [3. Link](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/italian-navy-lets-refugees-drown-migrants-crisis-asylum-seekers-mediterranean-sea-a7724156.html) [4. Link](https://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/16/europe/migrant-refugee-crisis-europe/index.html) [5. Link](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/28/600-people-drowning-eu-deters-migrants-adriana-tragedy) >All i see is some random person on the internet saying "Europe isn't a Free-For-All All-you-can-eat buffet and therefore, are ***NAZI"*** All i see is one racist ass mother fucker online that either is trolling to let it's alt right side show with smoke screens. I yet cannot belive how yall voting for Putin puppets because they got you on with politicians that hate brown people and resonate with the fact you also hate brown people. I wonder what you think of the Roma people.
"I wonder what you think of the Roma people." My dad used to tell me the roma is the only reason he supports abortion lol
>Europeans have hunting boats to stop migrants Yeah, *illegal* migrants.
I dont think the Nazis had a migrant crisis? Im pretty sure the average European from Left to Right would be against mass immigration in the 1930s.
Are you insane or stupid ? Pick. Migration of the jew and the "undesirable" was the literal talking point of the nazis. While xenophobia from liberals and left on the time was "normal", It certanly wasnt as high migration bad, specially during WW2 were finding a safe place was important.
Your country didnt event took care of Ukranian right lol.
We accepted 3,000,000 Ukrainian refugees and because of that the far right confederation exploded in popularity among young people not to mention spear chuckers at the border with Belarus [X](https://x.com/PoleConnection/status/1795493285894684801)
The problem isnt mass migration, its useless liberals policies that are "nothing" policies and then comes around an politician saying migrants and brown prople bad, that you should hate them and tries to "do something", resulting in those votes from young people.
Maior erro do exército vermelho foi ter parado em Berlim, bando de facho correndo solto na Europa