Employment and academic status are not permanent, nor are visum based on those without conditions.

Permanent residence was more akin to citizenship in that they were permanent and mostly unconditional. The discussion in Sweden around them often came into a discussion around what the difference between citizenships and permanent residence, and if that difference was meaningful.

The practical difference between Permanent residence and citizenship was that:

Swedish citizenship allows a person to be elected into parliament, employed by the police or work in the military.

Swedish citizenship are treated by other countries as Swedish citizens according to international relationships.

Swedish citizens that live aboard can vote in Swedish elections

That was it. Without permanent residence people need to become citizens to get the same rights as citizenship, as all other form of visums has conditions and limits.

Correct. This is decoupling LTR from Permanent residency, not banning permanent residency.

Study says

> France is the country with the highest level of discrimination, followed by Sweden. By contrast, Germany, Norway, and the United States have lower rates of discrimination.

It specifically contrasts Sweden and Norway, you just make it a „Nordic“ thing through confirmation bias.

> People forget Europe is a collection of literal ethno-states.

Because they aren’t.

> The US on the other hand is all the way on the other end of the spectrum, almost egalitarian in hiring by comparison.

It says Germany is on the other hand of the spectrum, similar to the US.

Why so dismissive? Have you even considered the possibility that rapid intake of millions of ethnically-distant foreigners may not be wonderful for the locals? Maybe they're right.

Exactly, we could literally replace the entire population of Japan or Canada with Indians and it would barely make a dent in their census. Is it any less "Japan" if there are no Japanese people, or any less "Canada" if there are no European people? Personally, I don't see race (aside from the ONE human race), so of course not. Maybe we even get some kind of awesome curry sushi out of it!

Happens to be the grifters are mostly pro fertility, make of that what you want.

About 2% of Sweden's population are refugees (!). For contrast, for the US the figure is 0.1%

And it's not like they are in a border with an active war zone.

My understanding is that giving permanent residence means not naturalizing, and therefore this is a step towards compliance.

Economic migrants are not refugees, try again.

Hold on hold on hold on, tell me about Finnish lunches, as from searching they sound pretty innocuous. (Surströmming I know of, no questions there)

marginal tax rates reached 94% in 1944 on income over 200k in the US. The high marginal tax regime gave rise to a period of relative equality. Nothing stupid about it - if a long right tail is a social ill (it is) then why have it?

You mean the wealthiest country in the world with a thriving, educated, well-integrated Muslim population that earns well above the national average income?

Raising kids is expensive and tens of thousands doesn't cover any significant portion.

However, it's not just money alone that is the problem. Money helps a lot, but like any complicated problem, it's got multiple front. Money for one, but another is just child care in general. This is based on my experience and other parents I interact with, but child care is fucked up. Not just costs. When I was growing up, my grand parents were very involved. They would watch my sister and I in the evenings sometimes or take us for a weekend or we would go to their house to swim in the summer. For some period, my grandparents had us in the summer while mom and dad were working. There is a phrase of, "it takes a village to raise a kid." And that village was close family and friends. Grand parents would pick us up from after school events. Aunt and uncle would watch us with their kids and my parent would watch theirs, vice-versa. It was grand parents, neighbors, aunts and uncles. Now looking at me raising my kids and my friends doing the same, it all on just the two of us (myself and spouse). Grand parents don't want shit to do with their grand kids unless it's Christmas diner. And that is a pretty common thread amongst every other parent I interact with. And day care doesn't exactly solve that. Day care solves the regularly scheduled care Monday through Friday during business hours. Not even forgetting that some places, where I live, its a 9 month wait list to get into any daycare. And then full-time care pretty much consuming and entire parent's paycheck. It doesn't solve the, dad's car broke down, Mom needs to go pick him up and help out, but can't exactly pack the kids up. When that happened to my mom and dad, mom dropped me and my sister off with my grand parents.

Tens of thousands of dollars? So ... nothing compared to real estate prices?

Not to mention how nothing it is compared to the cost of certain child care activities that one might have to pay for if one has a child with any health, neurological, developmental issues.

People are rightfully risk averse nowadays. Fuck the species if it just wants to bully its young into breeding.

The solution is obvious:

Remove commuting by encouraging remote work, incentivise dumb phone use or penalise smart phone use, create affordable property prices and secure future pensions, incentivise no televisions and create an environment where men and women can co-mingle naturally. You're right tens of thousands isn't going to cut it.

Basically apartment complexes with plenty of facilities like cafes, libraries, parks, restaurants and sports facilities and micro mobility solutions for transport surrounded by nature. Effectively reversing some of the trends we've established over the past few decades.

The reason this isn't done is because it wouldn't grow the economy, it would shrink the economy. You're effectively telling people to work less, have more leisure time and spend less.

When you start giving something comparable to the actual cost of having a child, it's going to matter.

You need more than one bedroom to have a child, that increases the price of a home in Vancouver by 200k. What should I do with tens if thousands?

I've been thinking about what kind of payment it would take, and I think trying to offset the potential career of one of the parents would do it.

So maybe median salary for ten years or something for every couple with their first kid?

Immigration is the solution. Producing a child and getting it college educated costs, to the parents and society, $400K+ (a 22 years ordeal with a lot of risks like the child growing into a drug user, criminal, etc.) Bringing in a college graduate immigrant - close to $0 in 0 time.

The same way like production of any products - if it is significantly cheaper to manufacture it say in China, it will be manufactured in China and imported, no matter what tariffs are, while domestic production will go down with overall increase of the efficiency of our civilization as a result.

I'm sure there's some level of payment that would do it. Tens of thousands sounds like a lot, but it's a bit of a joke for a something that costs 10x more and takes up decades of your life.

Every country? No. Every European country? Yes.

They can reduce or eliminate taxes on couples with kids...