Migration

I just came across a random post that was made today, where Grok AI was asked when will Europreans become a minority in Europe, and the answer was something I didn't quite expect... well I sort of did, but not as bad I guess, as to what I was initally thinking.

The question was:

"@Grok when will Europeans become a minority in Europe? You can estimate a year by country if you like"

Grok's reponse verbatim:

Based on demographic projections from sources like Pew Research, UN and experts, e.g, Eric Kaufmann, Matt Goodwin:

1. UK White British minority by 2063
2. Sweden: By 2045 (High migration scenario)
3. France: By 2055
4. Germany: By 2065
5. Netherlands: By 2050
6. Belgium: By 2050

Estimates vary with migration and fertility trends; Europe-wide, unlikely before 2070.

Then a follow up question was asked by another poster, and it was this

"When will Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Portugese, Polish and Hungarian people become a minority in their own countries."

Grok's response verbatim:

Based on demographic projections from UN, Eurostat and experts like Eric Kaufmann (considering migration and fertility trends):

1. Itlay: By 2075
2. Greece: By 2080
3. Spain: By 2065
4. Portugal: By 2070
5. Poland: Unlikely before 2100 due to low migration.
6. Hungary: Unlikely before 2100 due to strict policies

Estimates vary; actual outcomes depend on future policies

Then another user demanded a more accurate response based on mainstream demographers and institutes and not ideologists, so another question was put forward, and that question was.

"@Grok please give us the projections of mainstream demographers and population institues and not ideologues like Kauffmann and Goodwin, And please give high - low migration estimates"

Grok's response verbatim:

Based on mainstream sources (University of Leeds 2010 projections, Pew 2017, Eurostat 2023):

UK: White British ~56% by 2056 (principal); minority by ~2070 in high migration (net +340k/yr), ~2090 in low (net +100k/yr).

Sweden: Natives ~49% by 2065 (high migration per 2018 Nordic study); later in low.

France: ~40% non-European by 2050 (high migration, inferred from Pew Muslim 17%).

Germany: Similar, minority ~2070 high migration.

Estimates vary; no Europe-wide before 2080.

I then decided to ask other AI platforms, and got these answers regarding when the native people will become a minority in their own country.

1. France - 2040 - 2060
2. UK - 2060 - 2080
3. Germany - 2070 - 2100
4. Sweden / Netherlands / Belgium - 2060 - 2080
5. Southern Europe - Italy / Spain - 2080 - 2100
6. Portugal - 2100
7. Eastern Europe - Poland / Hungary / Czechia - 2120 or never

Overall estimate - First country France - 2050 - 2060

Most of Western Europe - 2070 - 2100

Southern / Eastern Europe - 2100 + if ever

It seems the biggest contributing factor to this is the large difference in birth rates, for instance

White British have 1.6 children per woman

Pakastani / Bangladeshi have 2.9 - 3.3 chidren per woman

Black African have 2.4 - 2.8 children per woman

In 2001, the White British population was 87%, which is now down to 74% - 76%

The projection is by 2030, White british will fall below 70%

The projection is by 2040, White british will fall below 60%

The projection is by 2055 - 2060, White british will likely become a minority of 45% - 49%

The projection is by 2070, White british will drop below 40% if the trend continues

London is already majority non-white, with 45% White British

Factors that could change these statistics here:

1. Reduced Immigration
2. Assimilation
3. Economic / Political shocks

Looking at these stats, it is not too difficult to see or understand that anyone who does have concerns with the way immigration is heading right now, does have valid reasons to have those concerns.

And no, I am not saying that this will destroy every country that does become the minority in it's own country.... but I do get concerned that when those immigrant numbers get excessively high, to the point where they end up being in the 60% to 80%, then I do get concerned about the erosion of indigenous traditions, beliefs or cultures, due to this immigration.

Madness, isn't it? Just giving your country away.

Lets ask the same questions to different AI.

ChatGPT

when will Europeans become a minority in Europe? You can estimate a year by country if you like

ChatGPT's response verbatim.

There is no credible projection showing that ethnic Europeans will become a minority in any European country in the foreseeable future (i.e., within this century), based on current demographic trends. That said, let’s unpack this topic with nuance:

?? What Does "Europeans Becoming a Minority" Mean?

The term “Europeans” is vague unless specified. Are we talking about:

1. Ethnic Europeans (e.g., people of primarily European ancestry)?
2. Native-born Europeans?
3. White Europeans?
4. Cultural assimilation (e.g., language, religion)?

Because Europe is not racially or culturally homogeneous, this matters greatly when trying to answer your question.

?? Migrant Demographics and Fertility Rates

1. Europe’s population is aging and shrinking (especially in Eastern Europe), while many countries rely on immigration to support labor markets and pension systems.
2. Fertility rates are below replacement level (~2.1 children/woman) in most countries, e.g.:
3. Italy: ~1.2
4. Germany: ~1.4
5. France: ~1.8
6. Immigrant populations often have slightly higher fertility rates, but these typically converge with the native population within one or two generations.

?? Country-Level Insights (Estimates)

No European country is projected to see native or ethnic Europeans become a minority (i.e., <50%) within this century, though some urban areas already have this demographic profile. Here are a few illustrative cases:

1. ~20% of the population has at least one immigrant parent.
2. Paris and some suburbs have majority-minority youth populations.
3. But on a national level, ethnic French people are still >75%+ of the population.

Minority-majority by year: Not expected before 2100, if at all.

1. White British people made up ~81% in the 2011 census (2011), ~74.4% in 2021.
2. Projections show White British could become <50% by 2060–2080, but that does not mean "Europeans" become a minority — many immigrants are also European (Poles, Romanians, etc.).

1. Around 25% of the population has a migration background (2023).
2. However, many immigrants come from other European countries.
3. No credible projection has ethnic Germans falling below 50% before 2100.

1. Around 20–25% foreign-born or children of foreign-born.
2. Higher proportion of non-European immigrants (Syrian, Somali, etc.).
3. Minorities may form a majority of youth in some areas by 2050, but not nationwide.

1. Very low immigration rates.
2. These countries remain over 90% ethnically native.
3. No foreseeable demographic shift toward minority-majority status this century.

??? Localized "Minority-Majority" Already Exists

1. London: White British = 36.8% (2021)
2. Paris: No official ethnic data, but suburbs like Seine-Saint-Denis are heavily immigrant.
3. Brussels: Non-European origin > 50% already.

This reflects urban diversity, not national demographics.

?? If Trends Continue...

Even assuming:

1. continued immigration at current rates,
2. higher fertility among immigrant populations,
3. and slowing native fertility,

...the majority of Europe will still be ethnically European for at least the next 70–100 years.

?? Bottom Line

1. No European country is on track to see Europeans become a minority nationally before 2100.
2. Certain cities and regions already have “minority-majority” populations, especially among youth.
3. These trends depend heavily on immigration policy, integration, fertility rates, and definitions of identity.

When will Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Portugese, Polish and Hungarian people become a minority in their own countries.

ChatGPT's response verbatim.

Let’s directly address your question: When will Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Portuguese, Polish, and Hungarians become minorities in their own countries? Here's a straightforward breakdown for each country using the best available data and demographic modeling.

???? Italy

1. Current situation: ~92% of the population is ethnic Italian (2024 est.).
2. Immigrant population: ~8–10% (mostly Romanian, Albanian, Moroccan, Chinese).
3. Fertility rate: ~1.2 (among the world’s lowest).
4. Migration trend: Moderate immigration, but high emigration of young Italians.

Minority status?

There are no serious projections showing ethnic Italians becoming a minority this century. Even with current trends, Italians likely remain a clear majority past 2100.

???? Greece

1. Current situation: ~91–93% ethnic Greek.
2. Immigrant population: Mainly Albanians, some Middle Eastern and Asian migrants.
3. Fertility rate: ~1.3.
4. Migration trend: Some immigration, significant youth emigration during the 2010s crisis.

Minority status?

Ethnic Greeks remain a strong majority well beyond 2100, barring extreme immigration shifts.

???? Spain

1. Current situation: ~80–85% native Spaniards (Castilian, Catalan, Basque, etc.).
2. Immigrant population: ~15–20% (mainly Latin American, Moroccan, Romanian).
3. Fertility rate: ~1.3.
4. Migration trend: Steady immigration; large foreign-born population in some cities.

Minority status?

Unlikely before 2100. Immigrant populations are more integrated (e.g., Latin Americans), so ethnic or cultural shifts will be slower.

???? Portugal

1. Current situation: ~90% ethnic Portuguese.
2. Immigrant population: Mostly Brazilians, Cape Verdeans, Ukrainians.
3. Fertility rate: ~1.4.
4. Migration trend: Growing immigration, but still low compared to Western Europe.

Minority status?

Very unlikely this century. Portuguese people will remain the clear majority.

???? Poland

1. Current situation: ~97–98% ethnic Polish.
2. Immigrant population: Historically very low; recent spike in Ukrainian workers.
3. Fertility rate: ~1.3.
4. Migration trend: Minimal non-European immigration; government discourages it.

Minority status?

Not remotely close — ethnic Poles will remain the majority well past 2100 unless there’s a dramatic reversal in immigration policy.

???? Hungary

1. Current situation: ~96–97% ethnic Hungarian.
2. Immigrant population: Low; mainly ethnic Hungarians from neighboring countries.
3. Fertility rate: ~1.5.
4. Migration trend: Similar to Poland — low non-European immigration.

Minority status?

Very unlikely. Hungarians will remain the majority far beyond this century.

Summary Table

?? Final Thoughts

None of these countries is on track to see ethnic natives become minorities in their lifetimes or even this century. Urban areas may become more diverse, but nationwide ethnic replacement is not projected by any major demographic institute (e.g., Eurostat, UN, Pew Research).

please give us the projections of mainstream demographers and population institues and not ideologues like Kauffmann and Goodwin, And please give high - low migration estimates

ChatGPT's response verbatim.

You're asking whether ethnic Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Portuguese, Poles, and Hungarians will become minorities in their own countries and want projections from mainstream demographic agencies—not from commentators like Kauffmann or Goodwin—and with high/low migration estimates.

?? Summary: No Major Projections Show Natives Becoming Minorities

Mainstream demographic bodies—Eurostat, ISTAT (Italy), the UN, OECD, and national statistical offices—do not forecast any of these countries losing ethnic/national majorities this century, even under higher migration scenarios.

???? Italy

1. Eurostat/ISTAT project resident population: around 59 M in 2024 ? ~55 M by 2060 ? ~45 M by 2080 Middle East ForumIstat+2Istat+2Istat+2.
2. Foreign-born share is currently ~10–13% (net migration partly offsets population decline) OECDN-IUSSP.
3. Under median/high migration scenarios, forecasts still assume ethnic Italians remain well above 70% of the population even by 2050 or 2080.
4. No standard projection estimates ethnic Italians falling below 50%.

???? Greece

1. Total fertility ~1.26, population projected to decline from ~10.4 M (2024) to ~8.3 M by 2060 Statistisches Bundesamt.
2. Foreign-born population is low and even decreasing as of 2024 (~<5%) en.wikipedia.org+7en.wikipedia.org+7en.wikipedia.org+7.
3. No demographer predicts Greeks becoming a minority by 2100 under any reasonable migration level.

???? Spain

1. Population expected to rise slightly: from ~48.6 M (2024) ? ~49.3 M by 2060 Statistisches Bundesamt.
2. Foreign-born share ~19% (with ~11% non-European-born) en.wikipedia.orgen.wikipedia.org.
3. Even in higher-immigration scenarios, the majority remains ethnic Spaniards—no projections show them dipping under 50%.

???? Portugal

1. Population projected to decline modestly: ~10.6 M (2024) ? ~9.3 M by 2060 Statistisches Bundesamt.
2. Foreign-born share modest (around 10% or less historically) OECD.
3. Ethnic Portuguese will remain overwhelmingly the majority ahead to 2100 in both low- and high-migration scenarios.

???? Poland

1. From ~36.6 M in 2024 ? ~33.4 M by 2060 projection Statistisches Bundesamt+1Statistisches Bundesamt+1.
2. Foreign-born share very low (~2.6% in 2024), mostly from neighboring countries like Ukraine—these are still European origin euronews.comen.wikipedia.org.
3. Even with stronger inward flows, ethnic Poles remain dominant in all demographic models.

???? Hungary

1. Population from ~9.6 M ? ~9.1 M by 2060 Statistisches Bundesamten.wikipedia.org.
2. Net migration modest; foreign-born share remains small.
3. No mainstream forecast shows ethnic Hungarians dropping below 50%.

?? Migration Scenario Highlights (High vs. Low)

While most official projections focus on total population size, fertility, aging, and broad dependency ratios—not explicit ethnic shares—analyses like those from Pew do offer high/medium/low migration scenarios for religious/ethnic groups across Europe. For example:

1. Pew’s Muslim?projection model:
2. Zero?migration ? ~7.4% Muslim in Europe by 2050
3. Medium migration ? ~11.2%
4. High migration ? ~14% Muslim by 2050 pewresearch.org+1sott.net+1.
5. They note Greece sees only minimal changes even under high-migration: perhaps +2.4 ppt by 2050 sott.net.

However, these projections reflect religious-majority changes—not native populations—and do not imply ethnic natives become minorities.

? Conclusion Table

?? Key Note

1. Most statistical projections (Eurostat, Istat, UN, OECD) do not model ethnic composition explicitly, but the very low foreign-born baselines and slow increases mean:
2. ? None of these countries is expected by mainstream demographers to see its ethnic/national population fall below 50% this century, even under high-migration assumptions.
3. Pew’s religious/ethnic scenarios do show changes in religious shares (e.g., Muslim population rise) but these occur within an ethnic-majority context, not replacement.

From ChatGTP….projections for 2100

Projected Ethnic Composition of the UK in 2100

Based on the analysis:

1. White British: 33.7%
2. White Other: estimated at ~26.9% (since combined white population will be ~60.6%)
3. Non-White (all non-white groups): ~60.6%

?? Whites (British + Other) combined: ~60.6% of the population

Non-White groups: ~60.6%

..

Now when you ask Chat how Iranians are classified you get this:

1. Iranians would almost certainly be grouped into the “White Other” category, along with people from Eastern Europe, Turkey, parts of the Middle East, and others of largely Caucasian or Near Eastern descent not classified as “White British.”

…….

The question is what percentage of the population by 2100 would reflect traditional British values and that number will be substantially reduced unless those values are adopted by immigrants and their progeny

And Chat’s numbers don’t make much sense with both all white and all non white groups at 60.6%.

Those figure come from Professor Matthew Godwin a regular on right wing GB News.

His definition of white British excludes anyone with one parent who was not British. This would exclude such figures as oh..Winston Churchill and King Charles.

Why is white British being even used here. Should it not just be British or is that you can only be British if you're white?

The question is what percentage of the population by 2100 would reflect traditional British values and that number will be substantially reduced unless those values are adopted by immigrants and their progeny

What are these traditional British values that are not being adopted by immigrants?

And Chat’s numbers don’t make much sense with both all white and all non white groups at 60.6%.

Yeah A.I's can be hit and miss. When I asked the same questions to co-pilot, the first response was almost exactly the same as ChatGPT, that there is no credible projection showing that ethnic Europeans will become a minority in any European country in the foreseeable future.

Second question about specific countries gave almost the exact same answer as GORK did.

Third question just gave projections on population growth in general with no break down of native vs immigration population growth.

Funnily enough

I also recently asked Co-Pilot a question of what % of Gazan's alive at the time of the October 7th attacks voted for Hamas in the 2006 election. It pointed out that only 60% of the present Gazan population was alive back then, and Hamas got 44% of the vote but 76% of the seat share. So it calculated that 45.6% of Gazan's alive on October 7th would of voted for Hamas, it got that number by multiplying 0.60 x 0.76. It used seat share instead of vote share.

So I started asking how did it make such a basic mistake in multiplying the then % of the then population, by the seat share % not the actual vote share and it responded oh that's a great spot, distinguishing between vote share and seat share can be a tricky thing,

I was like WTF.

Eventually it did the proper calculation giving a much more realistic 15-16%, but it came off as like a deliberately skewed response.

A.I tools are useful but they are far from perfect.

The British value I like most is stiff upper lip.. There are plenty of signs of drooping upper lips, but to be sure we need to eliminate the effects of orthodontics which came late to Britain and may be masking the extent of drooping lip syndrome we have out there.

Sav, 30 years ago I was positive and had hope like you, now I realize it's all horse sh!t...the rainbow dream is nonsense...there is no coexistence...total assimilation by the masses...resistance is futile...mob rule...by the time you realize the fuck up it will be too late....good luck.

Sorry to hear about your change in outlook. Maybe if I had your life I'd feel the same, maybe if you had mine you'd feel as I do. I guess I already had the good luck.

My life is fine, but it's hard to see the gradual destruction of your environment and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it...uncontrolled migration is unsustainable...it destroys.

My life is fine, but it's hard to see the gradual destruction of your environment and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it...uncontrolled migration is unsustainable...it destroys.

Not sure what immigration has to do with the gradual destruction of your environment if your referring to South Africa, it doesn't have a particularly high immigrant population rate.

Not all migrants in South Africa are foreign nationals...Cape Town in particular has a massive problem with people streaming here from the Eastern Cape...rapidly expanding squatter camps are putting huge pressure on infrastructure... the city can't keep up to provide sanitation for all these informal settlements, so trash and waste are just dumped into rivers and wetlands....and there is no effort from national government to curb this...in fact they are probably encouraging it behind the scenes.

Not really the same thing as immigration.

Today:

Two people sustained serious injuries in a violent farm attack along Uitkyk Street in Franschhoek. Emergency services, including ER24 paramedics, rushed to the scene to provide medical assistance.

According to reports, the victims suffered severe injuries during the incident.

‘’

Stav

Not sure what immigration has to do with the gradual destruction of your environment if your referring to South Africa, it doesn't have a particularly high immigrant population rate.

You apparetly know nothing about South Africa and what happened in the country. In 1994 when the ANC Government took over in South the foreign Black population in SA was 8 million people from African Countries living in SA. These people were from time to time expelled by the cruel Naional Party regime - but normally would be back in South Africa witthin a month,

The present estimate is between 19 and 20 million non-South African citizens from African countries live in South Africa. The oficial ANC policy is that all African citizens is welcome in SA so there are little action taken against illegal migration from African countris into South Africa. Over 30% of the SA population are migrants from Africa.

The result is that persistent hatred of foreign Africans cause major riots in especially cities in the countries where foreign born people are attacked and if like in the case of Somali's and Nigerians who operate small businesses ventures those are destroyed by rioters and lives of such residents are in danger.

The local Black population hates te foreigners because they are prepared to work for lower wge and underscore the high nemployment rate of 39% in South Africa, The last riots where the SA Army had to intervene was in July 2023 - but the local situation is always inflammable and riots can wthout notice start by some minor incdents always taking place in SA cities,

However in the eection in 2024 this situation was part of the reason why only 53% of the registered voters in SA bothered to vote. The ANC manage to get only 40,2% of the vote. The rest went to other parties/ So why did that happen? In South Africa - unlike the USA - a generic system of opinion polls are used - and the predictions are remarkably accurate - in the election last year the polls indicated that the A NC would get 39.9% of the vote in the 2024 election - they got 40,2% of the vote.

So why did that happen - over he last 5 years a number of polls were conducted in SA amongst voters tp determine opinions of the votes in S A - but basiclly aimed at the Black communities. In these polls some surprising results came out and some were tried to be squashed by the Govenment and the mwdia because it showed ralarming trends:

1. 60% of the voters born before 1994 claimed they were better off under he National Party regime than they are now, living condition were safer than it is at present and the Governrment is ineffective and the criminality endanger their lives because of inadequte and incapable policing - especially in cities and bigger towns.
2. Of he born free situation - ie born after 1994 - again in the main in cities and bigger towns - 70% of the younger voters accuse the ANC of malgovernance, corruption and collapse of the policing system endangering their lives and deterioration of Government provided services like electricty and water and sewerage services - as well as criminality linked to Govenment Housing schemes for the poor - as well as poor education and drop in education quality in the country. ,
3. 72% of the Black voters reject the Open Border Policy of the ANC Government and suffer financially as a result of the foreiners undermining the living conditions of South Africans. .
4. The ANC got a major share of their votes (70%) from rural reas where the tribal authorities rule and the tribal kings and chiefs are part of the poliical elite benefitting from corruption in Government.

The present ANC Government is going the same way as the other Parties who took power in Africa since 1956 and the erstwhile freedom parties who took over power in newly independent countries are at present on the way out and only a few dictartorships survived ruled by sons of the previous dictators, The only thing that is keeoing SA alve as a coutry is dissipating fast, As much as I personally disliked the pevious regime - I dislike even more the present disaster the ANC became.

.

Today:

Two people sustained serious injuries in a violent farm attack along Uitkyk Street in Franschhoek.

***********

'Thirty-two people were shot, six fatally, in citywide gun violence from 5 p.m. Friday to 5 a.m. Monday, marking the most violent non-holiday summer weekend so far this year in Chicago.'

What's the difference?

None that you can discern apparently.

Well now that's exactly the reason why I asked, care to explain instead of ducking the question?

Tx

"Not really the same thing as immigration."

In Cape Town and other places in South Africa it is...on top of that we have to deal with millions of Zimbaweans, Mozambiquens, Malaweans, Congolese, Somalis, Bangladeshis, etc....put unemployment and poverty into the mix and were sitting on a time bomb...

Tthere are areas in Cape Town where immigrants are the majority and even local black people are scared to go.

Technically it’s not only immigration….there has been a huge internal population shift because some of the restrictions of Apartheid have been removed and some of the movement has actually been politically enabled.

But the effects are even more dramatic than the invasion of Europe.

Not sure what immigration has to do with the gradual destruction of your environment if your referring to South Africa, it doesn't have a particularly high immigrant population rate.

Sadly, this could not be further from the truth

South Africa has a huge legal and illegal immigration problem.....

Due to the various responses from the different AI's, how about we take AI out the equation then, just for a moment, and let's focus on one guy for now.

I think if there is one guy people should maybe listen to in this regard, it's Robert Bates.

Robert Bates is the research Director at the Centre for Migration Control, based at the university of Copenhagen, and his work focuses on the political, legal, technological mechanisms used to regulate human mobility, particulary in Europe, under the Center for Advanced Migration Studies (AMIS)

The Migration Control project is an interdisciplinary reasearch program funded by the (ECR) European Research Council.

Robert Bates has just come out and said that mass migration is "changing the fabric of Britain"

He also said "Assimilation has been made impossible by the sheer scale of mass migration and our national culture is damaged as a result".

"Stretched public services, from the NHS to GP surgeries to public transport and schools - are being further eroded by a low wage, low skill immigration system".

Robert also said:

"Politicians have ignored the concerns of the voters due to a misguided belief that open borders benefit the economy"

"We need a government which rejects the dogma and starts to scrap a whole raft of failed visa routes, end foreign nationals access to the welfare system, and invest in skills for the British workforce"

Alp Mehmet, who is the chairman of Migration watch UK, has branded the government response to these rising immigration rates as "complacent"

Mr Mehmet has said "Most worrying, these latest figures show that the speed with which the nature of our society is changing has not let up, and that the ethnic minority proportion of our population will become the majority in 30 - 35 years"

There was a caution that there might be an overlap in the data, although it is unclear by how much, but shadow home office minister Katie Lam said that the data showed that the population is rising "at an unsustainable pace"

"Britain simply cannot plan or build fast enough, to keep up"

"We must secure our borders and deliver a fair and sustainable immigration system that works for the British people"

Keir Starmer has now also recently come out and said that failure to control the system risked turning Britain into "an Island of strangers"

I have raised this issue before, because I really do consider this to be a hugely important issue in the near future, and now people in senior and respectable positions within this establishment, involved with monitoring this exact topic are openly coming out and raising their own personal concerns regarding just how bad this is getting......

Why are people not taking this seriously...... it baffles the mind.

I think if there is one guy people should maybe listen to in this regard, it's Robert Bates.

Why? Is it because he advocates a position which you support. Because when you look into Centre for Migration Control it looks sketchy.

Robert Bates is the research Director at the Centre for Migration Control, based at the university of Copenhagen, and his work focuses on the political, legal, technological mechanisms used to regulate human mobility, particulary in Europe, under the Center for Advanced Migration Studies (AMIS)

The Migration Control project is an interdisciplinary reasearch program funded by the (ECR) European Research Council.

The Centre for Migration Control is a think tank advocating for a reduction of immigration. It has published 11 papers on the topic, all of them authored by Robert Bates who would appear to be the only person associated with the think tank, there is no public records of anyone else contributing to Centre for Migration Control.

It is not funded by the European Research Council (nor is the Centre for Advanced Migration Studies). There is no public records of who funds it.

Why? Is it because he advocates a position which you support. Because when you look into Centre for Migration Control it looks sketchy.

Because he has published quite a few articles on this specific issue, so rather than trying to get some kind of consensus from different AI programs, which according to some posts made here recently, seem to be quite varied on this topic, I decided to rather look at someone who specialises in this field.

By all means, if you don't agree with anything that Robert Bates is saying, or if his information is incorrect in some way, then post an alternative published report or article that stipulates something different to what he states above that I quoted and I will read it and offer an opinion.

The Centre for Migration Control is a think tank advocating for a reduction of immigration. It has published 11 papers on the topic, all of them authored by Robert Bates who would appear to be the only person associated with the think tank, there is no public records of anyone else contributing to Centre for Migration Control.

Ok, let's take Robert Bates completely out of the equation here......then what about the other comments that were made regarding this issue, by Keir Starmer, Mehmet from Migration Watch UK.....and Minister Lam...... does this not resonate that their might actually be a problem coming in the near future....

And by the way, if your belief really is that South Africa "doesn't have a particulary high immigrant rate", then you seriously are extremly out of touch with what is really going on in the world around you, because if you really knew the truth.... you wouldn't embarrass yourself with a statement like this..

I decided to rather look at someone who specialises in this field.

Again why is he a specialist. His academic qualifications are not listed nor is his professional background. The methodology he uses in his reports is also unclear.

Compare it to a study conducted by the Journal of International Migration and Integration a peer reviewed academic journal that found no significant relationship between immigration and violent crime across 21 European Countries.

Ok, let's take Robert Bates completely out of the equation here......then what about the other comments that were made regarding this issue, by Keir Starmer,

Starmer l expressed regret over his island of strangers comment.

Mehmet from Migration Watch UK

Again you are citing to another right wing anti immigrant think tank which has previously been found to have published inaccurate and misleading statistics.

And by the way, if your belief really is that South Africa "doesn't have a particulary high immigrant rate", then you seriously are extremly out of touch with what is really going on in the world around you, because if you really knew the truth.... you wouldn't embarrass yourself with a statement like this..

It doesn't, the latest number indicated South African immigrant population stands at 4.8% of its population. Compare that to European countries like the UK, France and the Netherlands all over 13%, Ireland and Belgium over 17% ,Germany Sweden and Austria 19%, Switzerland at 29% and Luxembourg at 48% The US stands at 14%, Canada 23% and then extreme outliers Qatar 77% The United Arab Emirates LOL over 88%

So I'm not extremely out of touch, I'm actually correct and have nothing to be embarrassed about. South Africa doesn't have a particularly high immigration population.

It doesn't, the latest number indicated South African immigrant population stands at 4.8% of its population.

Where did you get that figure from?

So 20 million illegal migrants from Africa in a total population of 62 million is not a problem. Amazing ignorance.

"that found no significant relationship between immigration and violent crime across 21 European Countries"

I didn't say anything about this

"Starmer l expressed regret over his island of strangers comment."

Doesn't change anything at all

"Again you are citing to another right wing anti immigrant think tank which has previously been found to have published inaccurate and misleading statistics

What stats were these?

So I'm not extremely out of touch, I'm actually correct and have nothing to be embarrassed about. South Africa doesn't have a particularly high immigration population.

You are so far from being out of touch with this comment, and also being incorrect here ....

"So 20 million illegal migrants from Africa in a total population of 62 million is not a problem. Amazing ignorance"

Yeah Mike..... no comment at all needed here.... but Stav knows best

LMAO.... 4.8%

"South Africa doesn't have a particularly high immigration population"

Too funny

You are so far from being out of touch with this comment, and also being incorrect here ....

Well its very easy to prove this. Link me to the numbers please.

Yeah Mike..... no comment at all needed here.... but Stav knows best

LMAO.... 4.8%

Mike posts an absolute nonsense number and your laughing me?

Too funny

Incredulous laughter is not a rebuttal. Link to numbers please.

That was the estimate in a Parliamtary report, Nobody knows what the actual is, but 4,8% is BS supreme. So where did that 4,8% figure come from.

The 8 million illegals were based on a survey undertaken for the Government in 1993 and was slighly over that figure The fact is that in he period Mugabe ruled Zimbabwe the Zinbabwe population went down from 17 to 12 mllion people, The other 5 million you would find in SA. Mozambicans are the next bggest group in SA, Since 2000 the floodgates opened for Nigerians, The Congo, Somalia and other countries opened up later, as well

,

Maintaining a population's current size requires a birth rate of 2.2%.

Average Birth Rate:

Developed Countries 1.7%

Middle East: 3.5%.

Africa: 4.5%

This is the common denominator of the problems that developing countries face. Their population size is growing faster than their economy, hence their need to migrate.

China decreased their population with a one-child cap, and that appeared to work well for them. Average IQ increased something like over 15% over 20-30 years.

China decreased their population with a one-child cap, and that appeared to work well for them.

It's causing them all sorts of problem at the moment.

Also there birth rate per women is 1.0

China have 1.4 billion people, but they are not that big geographically - at least compared to the US or Russia etc. If they become less people it is not a big issue, especially if their IQ continues to increase.

What is causing a problem economically is higher life expectancy which means that their will be more retired people than ever before.

Ideally developed nations could push closer to the 2.2% mark to stabilise population size, while still retaining their ethic majority. People may just have to work to an older age, assuming more are able than before..

The developing world needs to slow population down in a similar way that China did. That will help them reduce poverty and grow and working and middle class. Then they can grow their economy while crime reduces.

China have 1.4 billion people, but they are not that big geographically - at least compared to the US or Russia etc. If they become less people it is not a big issue, especially if their IQ continues to increase.

Oh yes it absolutely is a big issue for them. Possibly the biggest issue they face. Look it up.

Ideally developed nations could push closer to the 2.2% mark to stabilise population size, while still retaining their ethic majority. People may just have to work to an older age, assuming more are able than before..

Problem is once birth rates decline, no one yet has come up with a way of reversing it. Good luck selling working to an older age to the public.

It is hard to say what the ideal number of people is - more or less. However, to overcome poverty and war it might be best to have lower population - especially if this is happening naturally.

What is a concern is if a country has a declining population and then people from other countries migrate, they could become the majority. Apparently the name Mohammad has become the most widely used name for boys in the UK in 2025 - more than any other name

China’s fertility rate, indicating the average number of children per woman, also remains very low—estimates from recent years range from about 1.0 to 1.7 children per woman; both figures are well below the replacement level of 2.1 needed to sustain population numbers.

Japan's in deep shite cos their birth rate's too low

Well its very easy to prove this. Link me to the numbers please.

That would work if any report you could get actually included undocumented immigrants / migrants, of which there are millions here in SA..... far more than any census or population report out there can accurately give you.....but you would never know this, because you don't live here, you don't know what life is like here, who walks the streets, who commits the daily crimes, who comes to your door or business every week looking for domestic house work, gardening work, building work, tiling jobs, construction etc etc.......you just basically blindly believe what you read, which is something I have said about you before.... in so many ways you really are quite oblivious to what is going on in the world..... maybe get your nose out of all the articles you read and actually see what is going on around you

Talk to the local inhabitants, citizens, residents...etc etc..... because you know absolutely nothing, and you are completely out of touch with reality and what is happening on the ground..... and sadly, this includes the UK.

Mike posts an absolute nonsense number and your laughing me?

Yes, and to be honest, I genuinely still am laughing at you ..... only because, for a seemingly intelligent guy, you are incredibly out of touch with reality... you are so in your own little bubble.

Incredulous laughter is not a rebuttal

Neither is ignorance

I'm still waiting for your rebuttal regarding the actual concern of migrants becoming the majority population in certain European countries, as per what this thread was actually created for..... I am not talking about crime stats like you mentioned earlier, or anything else migrant related.... just the fact that you don't think that migrants will be the majority population in a few decades from now, and that this will not happen by 2080 - 2100 which is what you posted above, so then provide a published article that actually proves this.... and I will gladly offer an opinion, because at the moment it seems like you are avoiding it.

What is a concern is if a country has a declining population and then people from other countries migrate, they could become the majority.

Well not for a declining population but 4 Arab countries UAE, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain its already happened.

Apparently the name Mohammad has become the most widely used name for boys in the UK in 2025 - more than any other name

Already brought up in another thread recently. Its the 2nd year running its been the number one name for boys, though as I said its skewed by the fact that it's very common for Muslim families to name boys Mohammad as a sort of blessing at a rate which has no equivalency in western countries. Two spelling variants of Mohammed also show up the top 100 boys names and two other Muslim names show up in the list. That leaves 95 non Muslims names on the list, vastly outnumbering Muslims names.

Aside the point all cultures change and adapt over time, if you look at modern day Britain, its inhabited by people descendant from a hodge podge of different cultures, Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Normans, they speak a Germanic language, use a variant of a time calendar invented by Romans, modified by Italians, mostly follow a religion that emanated from what is now modern day Israel/Palestine. Over time British society will adapt to take on aspects of the cultures of immigrants while the immigrants will also adapt to take on aspects of British culture, gradually becoming distinct from the cultures they moved away, its the natural way of things.

Stav

I have many Muslim friends - most of them are religious and adhere to the teachings of Mohammed - whic include fighing the infdels and capture them turning them into Muslims and if they refuse kill them. That was the absis that the religion operated trhoughout the last 1300 years,

That is the basis of the Muslim religion that is the problem - teh fanatics never assimilate into any oher culture, The fanatics are cruel and hey are opposed hey kill everybody disagreeing with them. The Islam relgion lso has factions som are more fanatic than others.

The main problem areas are from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. In Syria where a bloody and cruel civil war reduced the number of Christians from more than a million to 300 000, ..