| ▲ | amtamt 4 hours ago |
| This seems a much more rational approach than pure political agenda driven fear mongering campaigns against immigrants. |
|
| ▲ | FabCH 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| This is about Swiss - EU relations. Everyone understands that a yes vote means the Swiss equivalent of „exiting the EU“. All Swiss-EU contracts contain a „Guillotine clause“ where if one contract is broken, all are immediately gone. The initiative explicitly requires breaking the freedom of movement contract, which immediately severs all other links to the EU. This _is_ pure political agenda driven campaign using immigrants. |
| |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > All Swiss-EU contracts contain a „Guillotine clause“ where if one contract is broken, all are immediately gone. The initiative explicitly requires breaking the freedom of movement contract, which immediately severs all other links to the EU Why does it need to be? Would freedom of permanent movement still be something Europeans would vote for today? Will the EU really hold hard on this line with Switzerland? (And does it make political sense to?) | | |
| ▲ | FabCH 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Support for EU within EU is growing since the war in Ukraine and has gone to overdrive since Trump 2.0. No current political party except for fringe parties in any EU state advocates for exiting the EU or ending the four freedoms. It’s reasonable to say that yes, EU citizens do approve of freedom of movement in EU. They probably do want to limit freedom of non-EU citizens though… … which is exactly why the EU would terminate agreements with Switzerland if we start first. And why it would make political sense. They made that quite clear with the UK. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Support for EU within EU is growing since the war in Ukraine I believe you. But hard numbers? > No current political party except for fringe parties in any EU state advocates for exiting the EU or ending the four freedoms Eh, there seems to be massive demand for modifying either freedom of movement or the context around it. > They made that quite clear with the UK The UK invoked Article 50. That wouldn’t happen here. | | |
| ▲ | FabCH 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | There is no demand for modifying freedom of movement within EU. It’s not even a topic in most EU countries. What IS a topic, is preventing non-EU migration, and that has broad support and slowly all parties are moving in that direction. And we are NOT EU. But for now, they basically go „yes yes, but we think of you as EU because we are so tightly connected“. So what do you expect to happen if we push the point and make them treat us as non-EU? | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > There is no demand for modifying freedom of movement within EU Again, based on what polling? > what do you expect to happen if we push the point and make them treat us as non-EU? I frankly don't expect the EU to be unreasonably spiteful. (And for the record, I don’t think the EU was spiteful with the UK.) | | |
| ▲ | greggoB 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > Again, based on what polling? Do you have evidence/polling to suggest otherwise? |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | surgical_fire 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Would freedom of permanent movement still be something Europeans would vote for today? My guess is yes. It's one of the best things that the EU brings. |
| |
| ▲ | amtamt 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Of course it is political agenda driven, but at least from surface it does not have _fear mongering_ vibe, comparing for example with Sweden which did not conclude citizenship applications and applied back dated refusal. Also politician openly attribting all immigrants as source of increasing crime and lowering education levels. 10m is larger than current resident counts, so people moving in can decide now if they want to move with uncertainty. It is not what everyone would like, but it is more understandable that recent Swedish changes, for example. | |
| ▲ | seanmcdirmid 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is not a vote for Switzerland to exit the EU...for obvious reasons. It is a vote to exit the Schengen. | | |
| ▲ | tonfa 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "the swiss equivalent" As OP explains, freedom of movement can't be stopped in isolation from the rest of the bilaterals. (btw funnily Schengen is just about the border control, we're talking about freedom of movement which is a different thing, e.g. UK wasn't in Schengen but the freedom of movement applied to UK as well before brexit, tho I guess people use Schengen interchangeably) | |
| ▲ | FabCH 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Which immediately triggers the guillotine clause in all other bilateral treaties including movement of goods and services, Horizon, energy market etc. „Exiting the EU“ is a perfectly adequate way to summarize it to a world audience that doesn’t care about the details. | |
| ▲ | soco 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Even worse then - no more visa free travel, and no more international collaboration on crime. I must wonder, who would profit from these? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | lukan 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Hm. Are there any difference in the consequences for the immigrants, if they are kicked out because of arbitrary population cap, instead of anti-migration laws? |
| |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | d1sxeyes 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As far as I understand, action begins when the population hits 9.5M, so likely no-one gets kicked out, but fewer new visas will be approved, etc. | | |
| ▲ | lukan 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I am pretty sure there are many people living in swiss with temporary visa's and those will then be de facto kicked out, if they do not get their permissions extended. | |
| ▲ | herbst 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This. As immigrant I don't feel threatened by this at all. I can't vote, and I wouldn't vote for SVP but as far as I can tell this makes kinda sense. |
| |
| ▲ | fractallyte 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why would you assume the population cap is arbitrary? There's a calculable limit to the population an area of land can sustain. (Yes, some agricultural practices can mitigate that, but that should also be weighed against culture and history, and how much change is acceptable.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity | | |
| ▲ | lukan 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Ok, so how to calculate it for switzerland in a non arbitrary way? (Btw. I believe switzerland is not trying to be self sufficient anyway, but donimport lots of stuff, like most other countries do) |
|
|
|
| ▲ | acivitillo 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What is rational about this exactly? They share no borders with the countries most immigrants come from, they are moving the problem to Spain, Italy, Greece. |
| |
| ▲ | FabCH 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Vast majority of immigrants to Switzerland come from Spain, Italy, Greece and other EU countries… | | |
|
|
| ▲ | slopinthebag 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I agree. Every country has a limit, unspoken or not, let the people decide. Anything less is undemocratic. |
|
| ▲ | amunozo 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| What's rational in the arbitrary number of 10 millions for no reason at allM |
| |
| ▲ | naths88 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is completely irrational. But the UDC knows it, pure manipulation of the masses. | | |
| ▲ | herbst 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's not completely irrational. It's a fixed placative number yes. But reality is also we don't produce more food than we already do. More people means more import and it's actually lowering the quality of the available food, making shopping more complicated, etc. And that's just the food quality aspect, what about pensions? Health care? ... | | |
| ▲ | foldr 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | >what about pensions? Health care? What about health care if there's no more 'room' for the immigrants who make up a substantial fraction of health workers in Switzerland? | | |
| ▲ | logancbrown 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Swiss people are perfectly capable of becoming health workers? What kind of argument is this? | | |
| ▲ | foldr an hour ago | parent [-] | | That's an option, but it takes a long time to train and recruit locally, costs a lot of money, and you'll probably have to increase salaries to get the required numbers. If there were an easy and cheap way to recruit all the required staff locally, that would already be happening. |
|
|
|
|
|
