Sweden’s government on Tuesday said it would put forward a bill introducing a requirement for migrants to adhere to an “honest living” or face deportation.
Because laws and governance focusing on citizenship, ethnicity etc is wildly against the sentiment of equal treatment and value of humans. It’s unlawful as well.
We don’t want an apartheid system.
Oh no, I didn’t assume you meant ethnicity, that was just an example and apartheid as well. It’s a better example than the US ‘equal but separate’. I just answered why Swedes are supposed to pay for non-Swedes.
What I wanted to point out is that those who has residence in the country can’t be treated differently before the law. Citizenship or not, the law applies and all it’s benefits and consequences.
On another note, the prison sentence is carried out and then the convict is deported, meaning we rehabilitated someone and then got rid of them, not benefiting from the rehabilitated person.
Oh no, I didn’t assume you meant ethnicity, that was just an example and apartheid as well. It’s a better example than the US ‘equal but separate’. I just answered why Swedes are supposed to pay for non-Swedes.
I’m not quite sure how to connect apartheid to the deportation of non citizens? Apartheid is different treatment based on ethnicity, not citizenship. At least per the definition on wikipedia “a system of institutionalised racial segregation”.
What I wanted to point out is that those who has residence in the country can’t be treated differently before the law. Citizenship or not, the law applies and all it’s benefits and consequences.
Are you saying it should be like that or it is? Because as of now, citizens and non-citizens are definitely treated differently.( In Sweden and in most countries) One simple example is the right to Vote. You are only allowed to vote if you are a citizen. (Although some countries allow voting in local elections for non-citizens)
But I would even disagree if you meant it should be that way. Staying with the example of voting. I don’t believe anyone should be able to move to a country and just be able to vote. That would be a huge vulnerability for democracies.
On another note, the prison sentence is carried out and then the convict is deported, meaning we rehabilitated someone and then got rid of them, not benefiting from the rehabilitated person.
No argument here. That is obviously nonsensical. It should be either right away(After due process) or not at all.
Edit: Adding to the point of being treated differently under the law depending on whether you are a citizen or not. Thinking about it, it means exactly that by definition no? If we were not to differentiate between citizen and non-citizen, what would be the point of having citizenship at all?
Aw shucks, you’re not quite there yet. Let me spell it out: for someone who is not an extreme ultranationalist, contributing to public services for the common good is as natural (in fact, quite a bit more so) as contributing to those services arbitrarily restricted to citizens.
Aw shucks, you nearly managed to not sound like a condescending dick, but not quite! And you clearly don’t seem to understand what I was saying. Too bad.
To be fair, prisons in Europe are about rehabilitation and not punishment. Why should Swedish taxpayers pay for the rehabilitation of a non-swede?
Edit: I am talking about citizenship specifically
Because laws and governance focusing on citizenship, ethnicity etc is wildly against the sentiment of equal treatment and value of humans. It’s unlawful as well. We don’t want an apartheid system.
I see how my comment could be seen otherwise, but I am only speaking of citizenship.
Deportations of Non-Citizen criminals is legal in most countries.
(I’m guessing your apartheid comment was based on the assumption of me meaning ethnicity.)
Oh no, I didn’t assume you meant ethnicity, that was just an example and apartheid as well. It’s a better example than the US ‘equal but separate’. I just answered why Swedes are supposed to pay for non-Swedes.
What I wanted to point out is that those who has residence in the country can’t be treated differently before the law. Citizenship or not, the law applies and all it’s benefits and consequences.
On another note, the prison sentence is carried out and then the convict is deported, meaning we rehabilitated someone and then got rid of them, not benefiting from the rehabilitated person.
I’m not quite sure how to connect apartheid to the deportation of non citizens? Apartheid is different treatment based on ethnicity, not citizenship. At least per the definition on wikipedia “a system of institutionalised racial segregation”.
Are you saying it should be like that or it is? Because as of now, citizens and non-citizens are definitely treated differently.( In Sweden and in most countries) One simple example is the right to Vote. You are only allowed to vote if you are a citizen. (Although some countries allow voting in local elections for non-citizens) But I would even disagree if you meant it should be that way. Staying with the example of voting. I don’t believe anyone should be able to move to a country and just be able to vote. That would be a huge vulnerability for democracies.
No argument here. That is obviously nonsensical. It should be either right away(After due process) or not at all.
Edit: Adding to the point of being treated differently under the law depending on whether you are a citizen or not. Thinking about it, it means exactly that by definition no? If we were not to differentiate between citizen and non-citizen, what would be the point of having citizenship at all?
Why should Swedish taxpayers pay for the rehabilitation of a Swede?
Why wouldn’t they? That’s like asking why would they pay for their fellow citizens healthcare.
You’re almost starting to get it.
Yeah, because getting sick is the same as committing a crime lmao
Aw shucks, you’re not quite there yet. Let me spell it out: for someone who is not an extreme ultranationalist, contributing to public services for the common good is as natural (in fact, quite a bit more so) as contributing to those services arbitrarily restricted to citizens.
Aw shucks, you nearly managed to not sound like a condescending dick, but not quite! And you clearly don’t seem to understand what I was saying. Too bad.