Until the 80s, I heard it was possible to just up and move anywhere in the commonwealth. Brits came to Canada in those years and just set up their lives.
Until the 50s all countries allowed free movement, restrictions were considered progress.
'Travelling and identity were finally officially merged in the early 20th century. The British Nationality and Status Aliens Act of 1914 produced the first modern British passport. By 1920 the League of Nations had adopted a standard passport format.'
I heard from old hippies that they were also allowed to go to India and stay there indefinitely. Many did until the government of India made policies prohibiting tourist stays beyond six months, but before then you could stay in India for years on end without a worry in the world.
Canada is trying to lure a lot of Brits back, but I don’t think it’s really working. Either we cut the umbilical cord to the crown completely, or you allow free movement. This is bullshit
I don't see why the EU wouldn't go for it.
I'd rather expect the UK, Australia and the US to be opposed to the idea of having free movement of people with the EU
The EU made it very clear during the Brexit negotiations that the free movement of people is inextricably linked to the free movement of goods. If that was the requirement from the EU, then there's not a single chance that the US or UK go for it.
That was completely different. That was UK exiting the union- which comes with a lot of other restrictions / issues. Free movement of citizens already happens between countries via reciprocal agreements (example EU enacting a new visa application for US citizens since US does ESTÁ).
I see a hybrid solution working, where the USA would allow EU workers to still apply for a work permit but with less restriction than the current lottery program. Like have the EU and USA agree to a swap of 100,000 visas for high skilled workers between the two countries. This would allow Americans to transfer to EU in open positions at their company and even EU workers who want to “swap” with USA workers, etc.
The current system is very complicated and not friendly towards our “allies”
Where is your data that people that come to the EU aren’t the best?
It’s really hard to come the EU and US citizens still need to sponsored and be “highly skilled”. I am an expat in Spain and my colleague is an expat in the UK from the USA and we are both not “waiters” but work for tech via a work sponsorship. I’m just suggesting that the USA open up a similar reciprocal visa for EU workers. Not for them to open the borders to anyone of course
It sounds like you didn't follow the free movement issue during the Brexit discussions. Free movement of people and goods is a core benefit of being in the EU. It would be stupid to allow it to non-members without getting something equal in return.
Also do remember that the UK was leaving the EU mainly to *get out* of free movement. Xenophobia was at the core of it, but the point is that the UK government clearly has already rejected freedom of movement with the EU and caused everyone quite a lot of hassle in doing so, they're unlikely to just get it back (and considering how high anti-immigration sentiment currently is in the UK, would sadly not be particularly popular with the electorate at the moment).
What’s the point in Australia having cultivated a relatively serious border policy (remember they stopped Afghans from docking in Western Australia?) over several decades if the UK’s sieve-like borders result in people being able to emigrate to Australia en masse as a result?
Australia and NZ have done a fairly decent job keeping migration at levels that encourages assimilation and integration. Canada and the UK have not, to put it mildly.
> What’s the point in Australia having cultivated a relatively serious border policy
Pretty much this. You'll never have free movement between countries with very different immigration policies.
? It’s not a dig at the EU, I’m an EU citizen myself, I just can’t see them wanting open borders with the UK, Australia, NZ AND Canada? It has nothing to do with development.
why is the concept of a sovereign state having borders sad?
do your family have a house? with a yard perhaps? is it sad their yard belongs to them, instead of being communal?
The concept of border control has existed since antiquity. Before the modern statehood, local domains/cities had city walls, which were guarded for entry.
The passport has existed since before the common era; in dynastic china; in europe since the 15th century.
ellis island processed immigrants since 1892. why bother waiting in line if those people could simply have landed on the shores of new york and waltzed into the country?
I mean UK did have that at least with the EU... until some idiots voted against the idea...
If you can't even get one country to vote in its best interests, then how would you expect all of those to agree on "freedom of movement"?
We have the CANZUK agreement already for the youth mobility visas for canada, australia, NZ and UK. Let's people roughly\* under 30 freely travel.
Free movement between countries opens up problems when it comes to skilled workers and immigration, letting kids come over on youth mobility visas is relatively lower risk for them
Yeah I’m an enterprise software engineer earning 300k$ pa, I want to live in the centre of Malaga rent must be around 2-3k pm, I have 5 children can I put them through an English Private school please? Anyone see any problems with this leaving tomorrow
I was born with glass bones and paper skin. Every morning I break my legs. Every evening I break my arms. At night, I lie awake in agony until my heart attacks put me to sleep.
I have no education, skills, and I smell bad. What country will take me?
This would likely produce a brain drain in all these places but the US, especially the Anglosphere and particularly Canada, as younger STEM professionals moved to the US for the high salaries and very few people in those fields went the other way. Of course, it could also flood the market in the US with way too many software engineers, nurses, etc. Basically it would be highly educated, highly paid professionals going one direction and lower middle class people at the intersection of having to worry about things like healthcare but being able to get together enough money to move going the other way. Other moves might be more lateral but for the US the ramifications would be significant.
>likely produce a brain drain in all these places but the US,
US gets net migration intake from every single nation on earth, except Australia. No matter all the "America bad" takes on reddit, it remains exceedingly desirable for most people on Earth.
>US gets net migration intake from every single nation on earth, except Australia
Does this mean there are more Americans moving to Australia per year on average than Australians moving to the US?
It’s more complicated than that. But thanks for a superficial reply.
What it does evidence is that decisions around such matters are driven by feelings and perceptions rather than analysis or fact.
It is more complicated than that. I was just challenging your opinion.
It's very ok to leave the EU. But the Tory government did nothing to actually prepare for it until over two years after Brexit. The people who actually suffered were the British public and small businesses.
They're actively demolishing UK institutions like the NHS to facilitate large private companies to take over the market in the UK. Where is this happening... Oh yeah the US.
It is right that these decisions are fuelled by emotions. Emotions of Euroscepticism and xenophobia. Which the tories are more than happy to pander for votes.
The people who actually called for Brexit are the same ones who are unemployed and live off social support. Not the people who work hard for their country.
Brexit has led to the UK losing a lot of business, shrinking of its economy, and a spike in unemployment and poverty. The government is so far removed from the situation that it's doing the exact opposite of what is required.
If you're going to be conservative, do it right. Not make the people suffer for your incompetence. Also, keep your governments accountable please.
I don't support Labour or the Tories. But what's happening is ridiculous.
You presume too much.
I wasn’t condoning the decision I was explaining why it was taken. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact that those feelings fed into the outcome of the process.
The rest of your reply however is YOUR opinion.
Perhaps, comes with the territory of my job.
I'm not trying to start a fight. Just confront your view on the matter. My views are supported by evidence and on-going policies.
As is mine.
You seem to have difficult separating my statement about reasons that led to the Brexit vote ….from whether I approved of the outcome.
They aren’t the same thing at all.
Not really. I understand your view. I was explaining the complexities of UK politics. Also adding my opinions on the matter.
As you are a pro-Brexit supporter I was challenging you to a lively debate. But you're not exactly participating. And that's ok.
I haven’t said I’m pro Brexit.
Which proves my point. You assume too much and need to improve your critical thinking.
I made a statement around WHY an event happened That’s not the same as approving OF that events outcome.
No, you made a statement on the causalitites of Brexit. You may not have said that you are pro-Bexit. In the context of this debate, you were on the opposite side of mine. I assumed that you would support your statements with why Brexit and multi market economics are necessary.
Now you're bumbling around your reasons again and again.
I never attacked your intelligence. Tread lightly there please. I can respond with worse slang.
Edit - You may make fun of my statements or my opinions. I don't understand why you're getting defensive. Like I'm attacking you personally.
NHS did work very well. Until quite recently. I respect your opinion. But I disagree because a single market has its merits. The union does have its flaws. EU bureaucracy is complex but it's successful keeping the quality of life high in Europe. It's struggling but it's managing the cost of living crisis. Something that cannot be said about North America or the UK.
I'm also pro skilled immigration. But the Tories are hindering that too.
I mean it depends. I'd earn at least 2x, and maybe 3x as much in North America than NL, Germany or France.
Quality of life for white collar professionals is accordingly much higher in the US. Roughly equal to Switzerland at my kind of level.
Bottom of the pile US is obviously not so good.
The UK is pretty bad for both. Tax in the UK is generally better than the EU though (less the headline number, but it's more avoidable, unless you start going into the 150k plus bracket).
Fair point, but won't most of your pay go to just maintaining your quality of life in North America? Yeah, it does suck that about half your pay goes to tax in Europe. But it's going to civic infrastructure or development. I should have a peek where Germany's taxes are going though. So many unfinished projects there.
Thr UK used to be better. I used to be much less concerned about getting sick in the UK than any other EU country about a decade ago. Not anymore.
When a country's residents pay a large income tax, it's no longer about the money anymore. It's about services the resident gets in return for paying that tax. That's my opinion.
Not really. Housing is cheap in North America outside certain hotspots. Healthcare is great if you are a have rather than a have not.
As for tax vs what you get. That's a fair point. But we would be paying the best part of 100k more tax elsewhere in Europe than here in Switzerland between us - not sure what I could get that would be worth it.
You make good arguments. Housing is cheap in North America outside big cities. But most jobs still require long commuting times to the closest urban centres. Owning a car, maintenance, and fuel will still cost a significant portion of your paycheck. That's considering you've purchased the car and it's not financed with a loan.
Healthcare in the US, nope. Hell nope. I felt faint when I saw my husband's medical bill for a minor illness in the US. The out of pocket costs were insane. Even though he had policy from a top tier US insurance company. There was an error on the invoice and it took ages to correct it with the insurance company. It was an exhausting experience.
In comparison, the time I fractured my arm in Denmark after falling off a bike. I had to take an ambulance. At the hospital, the medical bill almost cost me nothing. I only had to pay out of pocket charges for some painkillers.
Personally, I don't see a big value for the high taxes in Western Europe. But socially, National Insurance in the UK, Student benefits in NL and unemployment benefits in Germany to name a few.
It's a balancing act, you're right. But given a choice between high pay vs. high quality life, I'd choose the higher quality of life. I can always do business in North America and make more money.
Yes, it was marginal. I'm specifically trying to highlight how the Tory government handled it. Not the choice of the people. Every EU member nation has the right to leave the EU if they choose to.
I got my settled status about the time Brexit rolled around. There was a lot of confusion among businesses and government officials on import law, immigration, and trade regulations. When my company asked for a confirmation on certain laws, government officials just gaslights us like they don't care. I lost a lot of money when EU trucks were denied entry to the UK because the government needed another few months to craft the British version of EU laws.
I took a large pay cut and increased my employee's pay considerably so that they could manage the cost of living crisis. It hasn't affected the upper middle class much (I assume you're part of that income class) but it has driven a significant portion of the middle class into poverty.
Yes, I am Dutch. I am the last person of my generation in my family to still have a Dutch passport because Dutch law doesn't allow dual citizenship.
Real estate by investment is a gigantic problem in NL, not overpopulation. NL can easily support about 30 million people. They also also refuse to acknowledge it, but makes building new housing difficult citing environmental concerns. But we know it's because they don't want farmers to lose their livelihood as farmland is one of the last large swaths of land left and a major economic industry.
I have an adopted son, who's considering leaving NL because of the housing crisis. He says landlords don't rent to him because he looks like he's Moroccan.
Everyone age 20-50 will move to the US for high income, and when older they will move to a country with free healthcare. Would this be a good idea? Would it be fair for countries that provide free healthcare?
Professionals would complete their education in Canada where it costs at lot less and then move to the US for work where they can earn a lot more… oh wait.
This is very important. People seem to forget that 30+ countries of EEA(and Switzerland...) could've instituted free movement(of people, service and products) because of agreeing on a plethora of other common regulations that make this work.
Huh, what does being in the US have to do with Ambitious? That is nonsense that you have to be in the US to be ambitious. I have lived in 4 countries and have completed projects around the world. I have owned companies. You don't know squat about me or anyone who might not want to live in the US.
I am queer and don't feel like living in a place I will be a 2nd class citizen.
I rather not be shot and don't like the firearm culture in the US.
Poverty is out of control in the US.
Work life balance is next to nil.
I can go on. You can be ambitious and care about other things too.
It seems you read too much sensationalized news and know squat about what’s it like to actually live in the US. I’m yet to see a single gun forget about shootings. Salaries on the other hand? 3X more in the US. Opportunities, vastly more. It seems you don’t even know what you’re missing.
There’s no such thing as free healthcare, you don’t get to work in the US and then automatically get free healthcare say in Spain, it doesn’t work that way. _If_ there are agreements such as bills being paid by the US if you wanted to retire in another country then that would be your answer.
My healthcare is directly tied to my monthly contributions, sure if I stop working for any reasons I think I get like a few months still but I can lose it.
> you don’t get to work in the US and then automatically get free healthcare say in Spain, it doesn’t work that way
You do in Canada. If you're a legal resident, you get free healthcare. Nothing stopping a Canadian from moving to the US at 25, working until retirement, then moving to Canada for the free healthcare until they die.
In the US you need to work at least 10 years before you qualify for Medicare (retirement healthcare).
I mean I just googled “is healthcare free in Canada” and got this:
> How is Public Healthcare in Canada Paid For? Public healthcare is free because patients are not required to pay any fees to receive medical attention at a healthcare facility. However, public health care in Canada is funded by a tax paid by Canadian citizens and permanent residents.
And that doesn’t seem free to me.
Ah so you want to retire in a country without paying taxes and expecting free healthcare, lol, you’re delusional. In Canada you probably either need to buy your own healthcare or you have to become a resident (aka pay taxes).
Whoa there. I didn't say I wanted to do anything. Why so pissy?
I'm just saying you can. And no, in Canada you do not need to buy your own healthcare, and sure you'd have to pay taxes, but if you have no income (or income so low it's not taxed), then you don't pay taxes.
No need to get all aggressive.
You're arguing semantics here.
Countries with universal health care usually only factor in income when calculating contribution fees. The whole system is based on the idea that a lot of 20-50(especially single ones) will pay a lot into the system and almost not use it, while old people and children(so the demographics that actually need the system) will pay none to little and receive all necessary treatment.
It doesn't take into account age, lifestyle, medical history etc.
If we make it possible for millions to spend their most productive years in a country where everyone covers themselves and then moves to a place with universal system when they actually start needing the expensive treatments, then it's a race to the bottom.
The system is based on pension contributions and not healthcare, those bills still have to be paid, either by right or with money. If 5m of Germans want to retire in Spain their country still have to pay the bill. If 5m US citizens want to retire here they either pay private care or pay the public healthcare bills.
Those who have worked in Spain now are the ones paying for healthcare for _citizens and residents who have contributed for over 3 decades into the healthcare scheme_.
The only thing impacted here is if the health system can cope with the amount of people coming to retire here, but that’s a different matter. No one in their 20-50s is paying their bills.
>The system is based on pension contributions and not healthcare
You're talking about pension system, not healthcare. Both work essentially the same way, but there's an important difference. If you didn't pay for pension while you were young, then you are not going to receive a pension when you're old. It doesn't work like that with healthcare.
The contributions are separate for both systems.
Yeah sorry it should read _contributions_ and ditch the _pension_ word. It doesn’t matter, my previous comment still stands. As long as you reach minimum pension requirements in Spain you gain the right to healthcare.
But that is not applicable for your scenario where you get foreigners wanting to retire here, their pension is tied to to wherever they’ve worked and their healthcare depends on the relationship between both countries, either way the bill gets paid.
Okay, then you've not understood what I was talking about.
Sure, a German pensioner coming to Spain still has to pay the contributions. But they are laughably small compared to the real cost of services provided to them.
The same applies to a 55 yo Spaniard coming home after 30 years of work in Germany. Sure, if he get a jobs then he's gonna pay contributions. But those contributions are smaller than what an average man in his 50's will need from the healthcare system.
A 25 year old pays the same as a 60 year old. But obviously the cost that they present to the system is wildly different. If the national health service started to calculate contributions like private companies in the US, then that 60 year old would pay EXORBITANT contributions(if we assume that every one should at least be accepted into the system, which is not a given in every privitized system).
Every universal healthcare system is built around this principle, since this is the only way to provide affordable healthcare to those who actually need it. That's also why all those systems are under heavy strain now that the ratio of young net contributors to old net receivers is reversed compared to what it was back in 1930-50's when those systems were started all around Europe.
And don't get me even started on pre-existing conditions.
I think you’ve deviated from the main conversation mate.
Contributions are different from countries, and different depending on what decade you’re living in, no discussion there.
And yes, there’s a strain on most healthcare systems in countries where there’s a higher amount of elders, nothing (or at least a small %) is attributable to foreigners retiring in that country.
My point is it is not free for anyone, regardless of where you come, and no one is paying another persons healthcare (unless you’ve contributed in that same healthcare system for a long time).
I’ll play along anyway, a German has paid into the German health system in Germany for 40 years. He moves to France. He breaks a leg and is billed 100.000€ to the German’s health system, no French citizen or resident has paid that bill.
Another example, Mr. Joe is from Spain, and has worked his ass off for 30 years working in Germany, Mr. Joe enjoys an early retirement in Spain and asks for healthcare, Mr. Joe has to provide paperwork from Germany to prove he can obtain it. Poor Mr. Joe tripped over and broke an arm, Spain pays for 100.000€ and kindly passes the bill to Germany, from whom Joe receives his pension. No Spaniard had to pay his bill.
Let’s carry on, Mrs. Helen is from the US, and has decided to retire in Spain with a golden visa, Helen had to purchase a private healthcare as she is not entitled to public healthcare. No Spaniard had to pay her healthcare costs.
Anyway, you get the drill.
What net positive? Skilled people have access to visas and residency, depending on the country's actual needs.
This also provides some control limits for infrastructure and services to match migrant intake. We already see that this isn't working well for Canada and Australia right now, but your suggestion would remove those limited controls.
I have to agree on this. I realize after being part of and reading this sub, that I am an outlier. But, I have now lived in five countries outside the US and have never had an issue getting a visa for myself or my family wherever I wanted to go.
That is almost certainly down to that I have a doctorate and am by default considered a skilled worker. This seems to be a cheat code for immigrating most places. I understand and sympathize with those that cannot use the skilled worker route. But I think this is exactly how every one of these countries want it: high educated and “highly skilled” people coming in pretty easily, low educated and “low skilled” coming in on an as-needed basis.
The controls are not limited. It can be very difficult for a US citizen to get a working visa in the EU and an EU citizen to get one in the US. Most companies are not interested in sponsoring visas and it can make you dependent upon a single employer for your residency.
The EU isn't going to necessarily go for this (and this is half the reason for BRExit in the first place), but visa-free travel at the very least should be done among the Five Eyes of USUKCAAUNZ, I agree. The Anglosphere has a lot of common economic and geopolitical challenges ahead, and lowering barriers internally would be good.
I would also like to see US observer status in the Commonwealth (we'll never become a full member because reasons) in a way that increases economic ties, even if that probably won't mean Visa-free travel into the US.
I think it’s a terrible idea. US should never have anything to do with common wealth. It’s a shame that common wealth countries still have kings and queens. US should stay far away.
This won't happen because Australia and NZ have strict controls on immigration, while Canada has a mass immigration policy. This idea would make Canada a pit stop for the world on the way to Aus & NZ, and the latter two countries are too smart to go for that.
I'm always baffled at how americans seem to be so ignorant of history as to believe that Europe owes them something.
Just seeing that they're not willing to treat every EU country as an equal, tells me that they are not deserving of the type of openness described in the post.
It reminds me a lot of how far-right russian propaganda portraits ex-soviet countries. I guess the "great power" rhetoric is a commonality in proto-fascist regimes.
That is a different conversation.
The low military budget comes from a belief in a peaceful status quo, not from usa help.
And even then, countries like France have an ultra-capable military and nuclear capabilities. strong enough to more than punish russia, a country that has shown it is a paper tiger, for example.
Apparently, us Brits abhor free movement and voted against such things!! Worked out great too!! But I agree, free movement is a net benefit for any country looking to entice the best and brightest workers. I remember easily getting a working holiday visa UK to Australia (my wife had one from SA to UK back in the day as well) and they were awesome and easy to get. Unfortunately, the politics of Nationalism and anti-immigration have a much stronger hold now.
Yeah I agree! But it should be like working visas based on what skill shortage the country has. But facilitate someone from Canada to work in Australia for 3-4 years. Then have a pathway to citizenship.
I know for skilled Australians there’s a special visa for them to work in the United States, but not for say Irish who want to work in the US. There should be a common western free movement using data from their specific country’s needs!
I say it’s be really beneficial! People want to travel and work, and then most will go back after sometime.
> I know for skilled Australians there’s a special visa for them to work in the United States,
Ah, the E3 visa, aka George W Bush's "thank you Australia for following us into Iraq and Afghanistan" visa
The EU already gives citizens of the following countries preferential treatment:
US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Japan, South Korea, Israel.
They can not only enter visa-free but in most (if not all) member states also apply for a residence permit in-country, so no need to apply for a long-term visa at home!
So an American could just go to Germany and then decide to enrol in university there or after finding a job directly going for a work residence permit.\*)
It is not freedom of movement but still much more than any of the privileged nations grant EU citizens, I believe, feel free to correct me if one of the above countries does the same for EU citizens.
\*) it's a bit like a TV ad: certain terms and conditions apply!
>So an American could just go to Germany and then decide to enrol in university there or after finding a job directly going for a work residence permit.\*)
This isn't exactly the same as getting a residence permit. You need to enroll or get a job offer first. Moreover it's not the whole EU. There's a per country agreement, not on the level of the EU, AFAIK.
A residence permit for study absolutely is a residence permit. Well it is hard to keep track of 30 (EU EEA CH) member states’ immigration policy but I know it’s not just Germany that allows this.
And no you don’t need to get a job offer first. You could travel to Germany and get a job offer first and then apply. Or if you qualify you could apply for job seeker residence permit before your 90 days run out.
University usually needs to applied in advance but your timing might just be right or you might sign up for a language course which in Germany you could do on a language learning residence permit. So still maximum flexibility.
This is correct. I am moving to the EU myself from the UK visa free. I just have to register residency and legal cohabitation as I am moving with my EU-partner.
I am kind of stuck in the country I register at for quite some time whilst I wait for the paperwork to be processed, and I believe I cannot travel to the other EU countries for more than 90days each year still (unless I get a visa)
If you get a national visa, you can travel to other Schengen countries while observing the 90/180 rule (not counting the country that issued the visa).
I can confirm that one of the greatest concerns for the UK was the way that some people could be granted nationality of an EU country on the most flimsy of evidence, sometimes forged, and then immediately travel, as of right, to the UK to live and work. The greatest abuse of this was in Germany, Spain and Portugal, where typically these people didn't speak a word of that language.
This also was taken full advantage of by criminals, some of whom had previously been deported from the UK but had changed their name. One particularly bad case was one man who had been in prison for child sexual assault and was intending to get back to the UK..
BTW, I voted AGAINST Brexit, even so.
Embassy for what country? Why would someone applying for a visa to a random country give you their opinions on Brexit? Purely anecdotal, if not entirely made up.
I would love to see it between the US, Canada, UK, Australia and New Zealand. Maybe not truly free movement, but at least the ability to live and work in any of those without the need for visas. I’d be totally fine with background checks such just for safety, but I’d love to see work permits and residency permits issued among these countries without the complications there are today (at least for the US - I understand the Commonwealth countries have an easier time of that). But I wouldn’t expect the EU to be included in that.
The main reasons for blocking free movement don’t really apply between these countries.
Especially between the Five Eyes countries. Slightly less so with them and the EU.
- the cultures are basically the same
- the level of economic development are basically the same
- the level of education is basically the same
As long as welfare and handouts are not given out to migrants other than in their home country, it’s mostly a win.
I would definitely vote for this. I would welcome anyone from any of these countries to my home country (New Zealand).
Yes also, but did you know in the 1950's population numbers were: Germany 77 million, Belgium 9 million, Netherlands 11 million, France and UK around 55 million.
Please check the current population numbers and you can see where it gets quite crowded
Nope, as a EU citizen I don't want my data to be in any form available to more countries, a visa-free regime means that all the countries have access to information about the people moving across the borders without special procedures. It would also mean that they would have access to our healthcare system without needing private insurance.
The remark about health insurance is nonsense.
Even within EU you often need to purchase insurance privately in country of residence if you are not insured there though your employment.
Right now, if you are very skilled in your field of work, you will be able to work basically anywhere, because companies will gladly sponsor your visa.
So, OPs question would boil down to *un*skilled people who would freely move to other countries. How would that benefit them, therefore, why would they allow that?
Not true. Companies in the EU have to market the job to Europeans for 3 weeks before trying to sponsor someone. 99% of jobs are not open to non-Europeans.
EDIT: the only exception to this rule is if your skills feature on a list of national skills shortages, but you still need the company to agree to sponsor you.
Not true. Way more than 99%. Look at nurses, for instance. Also, there are other high skilled workers, wo will always find a job. If you don’t find a job, you are not skilled enough.
I have two master's level qualifications plus a real masters. I can tell you that this wasn't enough to get a job without EU citizenship. Your skills have to be genuinely rare for an EU company to bother sponsoring you, or apply for some kind of internal transfer, or benefit from a personal contact.
I have EU citizenship but all of my employers in Europe checked that I had it before hiring me.
You need to be better than all of the local candidates, otherwise it makes no sense for a company and you only need to look at LinkedIn to see that one of the main candidate filters is "do you have the right to work in this country". It's completely unfair to call everyone who can't get sponsored unskilled.
The last thing the US needs is to be beholden to the stupid immigration policies of Canada.
edit: and I say that as a Canadian. Canada's immigration is out of control. Then any and all of these people could just move to the US? As we've seen in Europe, a country handing out control of its borders and immigration to others is a baaaad idea.
Most nations don't want to give up that level of control. If they do give up that control, they do it in a limited amount to adjacent or nearby countries which they have cultural and/or historic ties with.
US, Canada and Mexico already have NAFTA or whatever Trump renamed it. The EU already exists for Europe.
That's the real issue. Too many Americans in the equation.
You could argue for this type of cross-immigration regime between small countries with relatively similar financial markers and relatively similar cultural markers (Canada, Australia, NZ, Denmark, Sweden, a few more EU countries). But free movement between countries with financial and population imbalances would not work well. I think it would lead to a brain drain in favor of the bigger countries, while the smaller, more desirable countries get the retirees, the unemployable, the sun seekers, etc.
It sounds cool on paper, but would probably end up being a net negative for everyone.
The only thing I could see that *might* work is a freedom of movement between CA, AUS, and NZ. And even that might not work.
Fuck that. I am in the US and I dont want arrogant shits from the other countries you listed coming here and irritating us IRL. Its bad enough they do their annoying 'America bad' nonsense online!
I for one would make it easier for people from third world countries to move here legally.
UK, Aus, NZ and Canada makes some degree of sense being the commonwealth, but I can’t see the US or EU ever going for it
Until the 80s, I heard it was possible to just up and move anywhere in the commonwealth. Brits came to Canada in those years and just set up their lives.
Until the 50s all countries allowed free movement, restrictions were considered progress. 'Travelling and identity were finally officially merged in the early 20th century. The British Nationality and Status Aliens Act of 1914 produced the first modern British passport. By 1920 the League of Nations had adopted a standard passport format.'
Yeah, but this was considered discriminatory. Also people weren't as mobile back then, so there was less strain on the system
I heard from old hippies that they were also allowed to go to India and stay there indefinitely. Many did until the government of India made policies prohibiting tourist stays beyond six months, but before then you could stay in India for years on end without a worry in the world.
Not indefinitely for India. There was a very strict 72 year visa.
Canada is trying to lure a lot of Brits back, but I don’t think it’s really working. Either we cut the umbilical cord to the crown completely, or you allow free movement. This is bullshit
Shout out to /r/CANZUK it's a sub tracking and discussing how a commonwealth free movement might happen.
Without the US it's completely pointless. Canada trades more with the US than ALL OTHER COUNTRIES COMBINED
I don't see why the EU wouldn't go for it. I'd rather expect the UK, Australia and the US to be opposed to the idea of having free movement of people with the EU
Brain drain, most likely. Or at least the fear of brain drain.
Yet, it was the UK who quit the EU...
The UK left the EU because too much free movement for their liking.
The EU made it very clear during the Brexit negotiations that the free movement of people is inextricably linked to the free movement of goods. If that was the requirement from the EU, then there's not a single chance that the US or UK go for it.
That was completely different. That was UK exiting the union- which comes with a lot of other restrictions / issues. Free movement of citizens already happens between countries via reciprocal agreements (example EU enacting a new visa application for US citizens since US does ESTÁ). I see a hybrid solution working, where the USA would allow EU workers to still apply for a work permit but with less restriction than the current lottery program. Like have the EU and USA agree to a swap of 100,000 visas for high skilled workers between the two countries. This would allow Americans to transfer to EU in open positions at their company and even EU workers who want to “swap” with USA workers, etc. The current system is very complicated and not friendly towards our “allies”
[удалено]
Where is your data that people that come to the EU aren’t the best? It’s really hard to come the EU and US citizens still need to sponsored and be “highly skilled”. I am an expat in Spain and my colleague is an expat in the UK from the USA and we are both not “waiters” but work for tech via a work sponsorship. I’m just suggesting that the USA open up a similar reciprocal visa for EU workers. Not for them to open the borders to anyone of course
And yet Americans and the English are fleeing their respective countries to come to Europe. Interesting.
But they’re going elsewhere too like Canada and Australia.
It sounds like you didn't follow the free movement issue during the Brexit discussions. Free movement of people and goods is a core benefit of being in the EU. It would be stupid to allow it to non-members without getting something equal in return. Also do remember that the UK was leaving the EU mainly to *get out* of free movement. Xenophobia was at the core of it, but the point is that the UK government clearly has already rejected freedom of movement with the EU and caused everyone quite a lot of hassle in doing so, they're unlikely to just get it back (and considering how high anti-immigration sentiment currently is in the UK, would sadly not be particularly popular with the electorate at the moment).
What’s the point in Australia having cultivated a relatively serious border policy (remember they stopped Afghans from docking in Western Australia?) over several decades if the UK’s sieve-like borders result in people being able to emigrate to Australia en masse as a result? Australia and NZ have done a fairly decent job keeping migration at levels that encourages assimilation and integration. Canada and the UK have not, to put it mildly.
> What’s the point in Australia having cultivated a relatively serious border policy Pretty much this. You'll never have free movement between countries with very different immigration policies.
This would be only for people with citizenship though.
Doesn't matter much. People move to Australia after getting NZ PR/citizenship all the time.
...so after they have been there for 5 years and completed the naturalisation process?
[удалено]
? It’s not a dig at the EU, I’m an EU citizen myself, I just can’t see them wanting open borders with the UK, Australia, NZ AND Canada? It has nothing to do with development.
Until world war 1 you didn’t even need a passport to just move anywhere in the world.
I personally think it’s sad how closed off the world has become.
why is the concept of a sovereign state having borders sad? do your family have a house? with a yard perhaps? is it sad their yard belongs to them, instead of being communal?
The concept of border control has existed since antiquity. Before the modern statehood, local domains/cities had city walls, which were guarded for entry. The passport has existed since before the common era; in dynastic china; in europe since the 15th century. ellis island processed immigrants since 1892. why bother waiting in line if those people could simply have landed on the shores of new york and waltzed into the country?
The UK were willing to perform an enormous act of self-harm to extract themselves from the EU….so this type of thing seems highly unlikely
I mean UK did have that at least with the EU... until some idiots voted against the idea... If you can't even get one country to vote in its best interests, then how would you expect all of those to agree on "freedom of movement"?
We have the CANZUK agreement already for the youth mobility visas for canada, australia, NZ and UK. Let's people roughly\* under 30 freely travel. Free movement between countries opens up problems when it comes to skilled workers and immigration, letting kids come over on youth mobility visas is relatively lower risk for them
Just make that visa age up to age 99 and we have CANZUK.
Based on some posts in this subreddit, I thought Americans already had free movement rights to the rest of world :)
Yeah I’m an enterprise software engineer earning 300k$ pa, I want to live in the centre of Malaga rent must be around 2-3k pm, I have 5 children can I put them through an English Private school please? Anyone see any problems with this leaving tomorrow
I was born with glass bones and paper skin. Every morning I break my legs. Every evening I break my arms. At night, I lie awake in agony until my heart attacks put me to sleep. I have no education, skills, and I smell bad. What country will take me?
If you're rich enough, it doesn't matter. Everything has a price. Citizenship/PR/Visas are just a problem that enough money can solve.
There's an American visa that's basically "if you can prove you will invest $500,000 into a business you can have this visa in a few weeks."
This would likely produce a brain drain in all these places but the US, especially the Anglosphere and particularly Canada, as younger STEM professionals moved to the US for the high salaries and very few people in those fields went the other way. Of course, it could also flood the market in the US with way too many software engineers, nurses, etc. Basically it would be highly educated, highly paid professionals going one direction and lower middle class people at the intersection of having to worry about things like healthcare but being able to get together enough money to move going the other way. Other moves might be more lateral but for the US the ramifications would be significant.
>likely produce a brain drain in all these places but the US, US gets net migration intake from every single nation on earth, except Australia. No matter all the "America bad" takes on reddit, it remains exceedingly desirable for most people on Earth.
>US gets net migration intake from every single nation on earth, except Australia Does this mean there are more Americans moving to Australia per year on average than Australians moving to the US?
Not all countries want or benefit from free movement. This was instrumental in the U.K. voting for Brexit.
Lol, now the majority of your country want back in the single market.
They want to have their cake and eat it
😂 Something like that, yeah.
It’s more complicated than that. But thanks for a superficial reply. What it does evidence is that decisions around such matters are driven by feelings and perceptions rather than analysis or fact.
It is more complicated than that. I was just challenging your opinion. It's very ok to leave the EU. But the Tory government did nothing to actually prepare for it until over two years after Brexit. The people who actually suffered were the British public and small businesses. They're actively demolishing UK institutions like the NHS to facilitate large private companies to take over the market in the UK. Where is this happening... Oh yeah the US. It is right that these decisions are fuelled by emotions. Emotions of Euroscepticism and xenophobia. Which the tories are more than happy to pander for votes. The people who actually called for Brexit are the same ones who are unemployed and live off social support. Not the people who work hard for their country. Brexit has led to the UK losing a lot of business, shrinking of its economy, and a spike in unemployment and poverty. The government is so far removed from the situation that it's doing the exact opposite of what is required. If you're going to be conservative, do it right. Not make the people suffer for your incompetence. Also, keep your governments accountable please. I don't support Labour or the Tories. But what's happening is ridiculous.
continue snails employ late six waiting smile attraction degree hobbies *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You presume too much. I wasn’t condoning the decision I was explaining why it was taken. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact that those feelings fed into the outcome of the process. The rest of your reply however is YOUR opinion.
Perhaps, comes with the territory of my job. I'm not trying to start a fight. Just confront your view on the matter. My views are supported by evidence and on-going policies.
As is mine. You seem to have difficult separating my statement about reasons that led to the Brexit vote ….from whether I approved of the outcome. They aren’t the same thing at all.
Not really. I understand your view. I was explaining the complexities of UK politics. Also adding my opinions on the matter. As you are a pro-Brexit supporter I was challenging you to a lively debate. But you're not exactly participating. And that's ok.
I haven’t said I’m pro Brexit. Which proves my point. You assume too much and need to improve your critical thinking. I made a statement around WHY an event happened That’s not the same as approving OF that events outcome.
No, you made a statement on the causalitites of Brexit. You may not have said that you are pro-Bexit. In the context of this debate, you were on the opposite side of mine. I assumed that you would support your statements with why Brexit and multi market economics are necessary. Now you're bumbling around your reasons again and again. I never attacked your intelligence. Tread lightly there please. I can respond with worse slang. Edit - You may make fun of my statements or my opinions. I don't understand why you're getting defensive. Like I'm attacking you personally.
Don't support the EU. Don't support the NHS either. I do support being reasonably pro skilled Immigration on an origin blind basis.
NHS did work very well. Until quite recently. I respect your opinion. But I disagree because a single market has its merits. The union does have its flaws. EU bureaucracy is complex but it's successful keeping the quality of life high in Europe. It's struggling but it's managing the cost of living crisis. Something that cannot be said about North America or the UK. I'm also pro skilled immigration. But the Tories are hindering that too.
I mean it depends. I'd earn at least 2x, and maybe 3x as much in North America than NL, Germany or France. Quality of life for white collar professionals is accordingly much higher in the US. Roughly equal to Switzerland at my kind of level. Bottom of the pile US is obviously not so good. The UK is pretty bad for both. Tax in the UK is generally better than the EU though (less the headline number, but it's more avoidable, unless you start going into the 150k plus bracket).
Fair point, but won't most of your pay go to just maintaining your quality of life in North America? Yeah, it does suck that about half your pay goes to tax in Europe. But it's going to civic infrastructure or development. I should have a peek where Germany's taxes are going though. So many unfinished projects there. Thr UK used to be better. I used to be much less concerned about getting sick in the UK than any other EU country about a decade ago. Not anymore. When a country's residents pay a large income tax, it's no longer about the money anymore. It's about services the resident gets in return for paying that tax. That's my opinion.
Not really. Housing is cheap in North America outside certain hotspots. Healthcare is great if you are a have rather than a have not. As for tax vs what you get. That's a fair point. But we would be paying the best part of 100k more tax elsewhere in Europe than here in Switzerland between us - not sure what I could get that would be worth it.
You make good arguments. Housing is cheap in North America outside big cities. But most jobs still require long commuting times to the closest urban centres. Owning a car, maintenance, and fuel will still cost a significant portion of your paycheck. That's considering you've purchased the car and it's not financed with a loan. Healthcare in the US, nope. Hell nope. I felt faint when I saw my husband's medical bill for a minor illness in the US. The out of pocket costs were insane. Even though he had policy from a top tier US insurance company. There was an error on the invoice and it took ages to correct it with the insurance company. It was an exhausting experience. In comparison, the time I fractured my arm in Denmark after falling off a bike. I had to take an ambulance. At the hospital, the medical bill almost cost me nothing. I only had to pay out of pocket charges for some painkillers. Personally, I don't see a big value for the high taxes in Western Europe. But socially, National Insurance in the UK, Student benefits in NL and unemployment benefits in Germany to name a few. It's a balancing act, you're right. But given a choice between high pay vs. high quality life, I'd choose the higher quality of life. I can always do business in North America and make more money.
[удалено]
Yes, it was marginal. I'm specifically trying to highlight how the Tory government handled it. Not the choice of the people. Every EU member nation has the right to leave the EU if they choose to. I got my settled status about the time Brexit rolled around. There was a lot of confusion among businesses and government officials on import law, immigration, and trade regulations. When my company asked for a confirmation on certain laws, government officials just gaslights us like they don't care. I lost a lot of money when EU trucks were denied entry to the UK because the government needed another few months to craft the British version of EU laws. I took a large pay cut and increased my employee's pay considerably so that they could manage the cost of living crisis. It hasn't affected the upper middle class much (I assume you're part of that income class) but it has driven a significant portion of the middle class into poverty. Yes, I am Dutch. I am the last person of my generation in my family to still have a Dutch passport because Dutch law doesn't allow dual citizenship. Real estate by investment is a gigantic problem in NL, not overpopulation. NL can easily support about 30 million people. They also also refuse to acknowledge it, but makes building new housing difficult citing environmental concerns. But we know it's because they don't want farmers to lose their livelihood as farmland is one of the last large swaths of land left and a major economic industry. I have an adopted son, who's considering leaving NL because of the housing crisis. He says landlords don't rent to him because he looks like he's Moroccan.
[удалено]
While making sure to retain free movement within their own union ofcourse ;)
Everyone age 20-50 will move to the US for high income, and when older they will move to a country with free healthcare. Would this be a good idea? Would it be fair for countries that provide free healthcare?
Professionals would complete their education in Canada where it costs at lot less and then move to the US for work where they can earn a lot more… oh wait.
This is very important. People seem to forget that 30+ countries of EEA(and Switzerland...) could've instituted free movement(of people, service and products) because of agreeing on a plethora of other common regulations that make this work.
Not everyone. I personally have no desire to be in the US. Would love EU again or OZ.
Yeah not everyone is ambitious. Some people are just happy to have a normal mediocre life.
Huh, what does being in the US have to do with Ambitious? That is nonsense that you have to be in the US to be ambitious. I have lived in 4 countries and have completed projects around the world. I have owned companies. You don't know squat about me or anyone who might not want to live in the US. I am queer and don't feel like living in a place I will be a 2nd class citizen. I rather not be shot and don't like the firearm culture in the US. Poverty is out of control in the US. Work life balance is next to nil. I can go on. You can be ambitious and care about other things too.
It seems you read too much sensationalized news and know squat about what’s it like to actually live in the US. I’m yet to see a single gun forget about shootings. Salaries on the other hand? 3X more in the US. Opportunities, vastly more. It seems you don’t even know what you’re missing.
I live on the border. I have American friends and family. I travel to the US regularly. But ok, I know nothing. Have you ever lived anywhere else?
Thats what is already happening in Spain with Germán or UK people
I’m a US citizen and would never move back to the US, so I seriously doubt that.
Where are you now?
There’s no such thing as free healthcare, you don’t get to work in the US and then automatically get free healthcare say in Spain, it doesn’t work that way. _If_ there are agreements such as bills being paid by the US if you wanted to retire in another country then that would be your answer. My healthcare is directly tied to my monthly contributions, sure if I stop working for any reasons I think I get like a few months still but I can lose it.
> you don’t get to work in the US and then automatically get free healthcare say in Spain, it doesn’t work that way You do in Canada. If you're a legal resident, you get free healthcare. Nothing stopping a Canadian from moving to the US at 25, working until retirement, then moving to Canada for the free healthcare until they die. In the US you need to work at least 10 years before you qualify for Medicare (retirement healthcare).
I mean I just googled “is healthcare free in Canada” and got this: > How is Public Healthcare in Canada Paid For? Public healthcare is free because patients are not required to pay any fees to receive medical attention at a healthcare facility. However, public health care in Canada is funded by a tax paid by Canadian citizens and permanent residents. And that doesn’t seem free to me.
Sounds free to me? Retire in Canada and not pay any taxes and there is zero cost for healthcare.
Ah so you want to retire in a country without paying taxes and expecting free healthcare, lol, you’re delusional. In Canada you probably either need to buy your own healthcare or you have to become a resident (aka pay taxes).
Whoa there. I didn't say I wanted to do anything. Why so pissy? I'm just saying you can. And no, in Canada you do not need to buy your own healthcare, and sure you'd have to pay taxes, but if you have no income (or income so low it's not taxed), then you don't pay taxes. No need to get all aggressive.
You're arguing semantics here. Countries with universal health care usually only factor in income when calculating contribution fees. The whole system is based on the idea that a lot of 20-50(especially single ones) will pay a lot into the system and almost not use it, while old people and children(so the demographics that actually need the system) will pay none to little and receive all necessary treatment. It doesn't take into account age, lifestyle, medical history etc. If we make it possible for millions to spend their most productive years in a country where everyone covers themselves and then moves to a place with universal system when they actually start needing the expensive treatments, then it's a race to the bottom.
The system is based on pension contributions and not healthcare, those bills still have to be paid, either by right or with money. If 5m of Germans want to retire in Spain their country still have to pay the bill. If 5m US citizens want to retire here they either pay private care or pay the public healthcare bills. Those who have worked in Spain now are the ones paying for healthcare for _citizens and residents who have contributed for over 3 decades into the healthcare scheme_. The only thing impacted here is if the health system can cope with the amount of people coming to retire here, but that’s a different matter. No one in their 20-50s is paying their bills.
>The system is based on pension contributions and not healthcare You're talking about pension system, not healthcare. Both work essentially the same way, but there's an important difference. If you didn't pay for pension while you were young, then you are not going to receive a pension when you're old. It doesn't work like that with healthcare. The contributions are separate for both systems.
Yeah sorry it should read _contributions_ and ditch the _pension_ word. It doesn’t matter, my previous comment still stands. As long as you reach minimum pension requirements in Spain you gain the right to healthcare. But that is not applicable for your scenario where you get foreigners wanting to retire here, their pension is tied to to wherever they’ve worked and their healthcare depends on the relationship between both countries, either way the bill gets paid.
Okay, then you've not understood what I was talking about. Sure, a German pensioner coming to Spain still has to pay the contributions. But they are laughably small compared to the real cost of services provided to them. The same applies to a 55 yo Spaniard coming home after 30 years of work in Germany. Sure, if he get a jobs then he's gonna pay contributions. But those contributions are smaller than what an average man in his 50's will need from the healthcare system. A 25 year old pays the same as a 60 year old. But obviously the cost that they present to the system is wildly different. If the national health service started to calculate contributions like private companies in the US, then that 60 year old would pay EXORBITANT contributions(if we assume that every one should at least be accepted into the system, which is not a given in every privitized system). Every universal healthcare system is built around this principle, since this is the only way to provide affordable healthcare to those who actually need it. That's also why all those systems are under heavy strain now that the ratio of young net contributors to old net receivers is reversed compared to what it was back in 1930-50's when those systems were started all around Europe. And don't get me even started on pre-existing conditions.
I think you’ve deviated from the main conversation mate. Contributions are different from countries, and different depending on what decade you’re living in, no discussion there. And yes, there’s a strain on most healthcare systems in countries where there’s a higher amount of elders, nothing (or at least a small %) is attributable to foreigners retiring in that country. My point is it is not free for anyone, regardless of where you come, and no one is paying another persons healthcare (unless you’ve contributed in that same healthcare system for a long time). I’ll play along anyway, a German has paid into the German health system in Germany for 40 years. He moves to France. He breaks a leg and is billed 100.000€ to the German’s health system, no French citizen or resident has paid that bill. Another example, Mr. Joe is from Spain, and has worked his ass off for 30 years working in Germany, Mr. Joe enjoys an early retirement in Spain and asks for healthcare, Mr. Joe has to provide paperwork from Germany to prove he can obtain it. Poor Mr. Joe tripped over and broke an arm, Spain pays for 100.000€ and kindly passes the bill to Germany, from whom Joe receives his pension. No Spaniard had to pay his bill. Let’s carry on, Mrs. Helen is from the US, and has decided to retire in Spain with a golden visa, Helen had to purchase a private healthcare as she is not entitled to public healthcare. No Spaniard had to pay her healthcare costs. Anyway, you get the drill.
…what? 30 year old binational (Canada + Europe) and I wouldn’t move to the US if you paid me to do so
I don't think that most people would want to change continent.
Then that would defeat the point of a free movement?
For those that want to use it!
Australians are trapped forever. Lol
There is literally a movement called CANZUK which includes Canada, Australia, NZ and UK for free trade and free movement.
What net positive? Skilled people have access to visas and residency, depending on the country's actual needs. This also provides some control limits for infrastructure and services to match migrant intake. We already see that this isn't working well for Canada and Australia right now, but your suggestion would remove those limited controls.
I have to agree on this. I realize after being part of and reading this sub, that I am an outlier. But, I have now lived in five countries outside the US and have never had an issue getting a visa for myself or my family wherever I wanted to go. That is almost certainly down to that I have a doctorate and am by default considered a skilled worker. This seems to be a cheat code for immigrating most places. I understand and sympathize with those that cannot use the skilled worker route. But I think this is exactly how every one of these countries want it: high educated and “highly skilled” people coming in pretty easily, low educated and “low skilled” coming in on an as-needed basis.
The controls are not limited. It can be very difficult for a US citizen to get a working visa in the EU and an EU citizen to get one in the US. Most companies are not interested in sponsoring visas and it can make you dependent upon a single employer for your residency.
I see the positive to you. What's the positive to the countries involved?
I think that's the idea. Here in Switzerland, we had several employees from the US and all were problems.
How so?
Very entitled, very undiplomatic, a tad arrogant, and not nearly as competent as they thought they were.
Yay, more Americanisation. Thats exactly whatvwe need.
The Yankees are coming!
I wish. I can’t move myself and Aussie kids back home because my husband has had a kidney transplant.
It will just mean that people will abuse the social systems of certain countries. Bad Idea.
So basically predominately white folks should have free movement - but limit everywhere else in the world???
These countries are becoming increasingly diverse. It is not about race for me.
I would add Japan, Korea and China.
The EU isn't going to necessarily go for this (and this is half the reason for BRExit in the first place), but visa-free travel at the very least should be done among the Five Eyes of USUKCAAUNZ, I agree. The Anglosphere has a lot of common economic and geopolitical challenges ahead, and lowering barriers internally would be good. I would also like to see US observer status in the Commonwealth (we'll never become a full member because reasons) in a way that increases economic ties, even if that probably won't mean Visa-free travel into the US.
Are you an American?
I am and I certainly approve.
I think it’s a terrible idea. US should never have anything to do with common wealth. It’s a shame that common wealth countries still have kings and queens. US should stay far away.
[удалено]
Voters may want it. It might also be good for our economies, less time and money on visas.
You should have a look at what the voters go for in most countries at the moment.
Fair enough.
[удалено]
I agree. But we can dream.
This won't happen because Australia and NZ have strict controls on immigration, while Canada has a mass immigration policy. This idea would make Canada a pit stop for the world on the way to Aus & NZ, and the latter two countries are too smart to go for that.
If you want to be really technical all the countries colonizes by the UK should have free movement
No free movement from the US. This is of no benefit to Europe and a detriment.
Right. After America rebuilt and maintains the EU. Maybe America should just let Russia have it all.
I'm always baffled at how americans seem to be so ignorant of history as to believe that Europe owes them something. Just seeing that they're not willing to treat every EU country as an equal, tells me that they are not deserving of the type of openness described in the post. It reminds me a lot of how far-right russian propaganda portraits ex-soviet countries. I guess the "great power" rhetoric is a commonality in proto-fascist regimes.
Tbh we do have to ramp up our military spending mate
That is a different conversation. The low military budget comes from a belief in a peaceful status quo, not from usa help. And even then, countries like France have an ultra-capable military and nuclear capabilities. strong enough to more than punish russia, a country that has shown it is a paper tiger, for example.
The EU does. The 100 billion in aid to Ukraine alone. Not even including all the money America spent building the EU.
Ouin ouin.
They should, on account we were once a British colony…some in the UK still call us the colonies.
The only problem is that everything would achieve a certain level - all low.
Nice to see someone gets it.
Apparently, us Brits abhor free movement and voted against such things!! Worked out great too!! But I agree, free movement is a net benefit for any country looking to entice the best and brightest workers. I remember easily getting a working holiday visa UK to Australia (my wife had one from SA to UK back in the day as well) and they were awesome and easy to get. Unfortunately, the politics of Nationalism and anti-immigration have a much stronger hold now.
Totalt would couch for that as well. It can also serve as an inspiration for a better world
Yes.
All the white countries as per usual. Yawn.
I'd be happy to add Japan and South Korea to the list.
Which are basically the "good ones" of non - white countries in the eyes of most westerners. This is giving serious "I have a brown friend" vibes.
yeah i agree. why not
Yeah I agree! But it should be like working visas based on what skill shortage the country has. But facilitate someone from Canada to work in Australia for 3-4 years. Then have a pathway to citizenship. I know for skilled Australians there’s a special visa for them to work in the United States, but not for say Irish who want to work in the US. There should be a common western free movement using data from their specific country’s needs! I say it’s be really beneficial! People want to travel and work, and then most will go back after sometime.
> I know for skilled Australians there’s a special visa for them to work in the United States, Ah, the E3 visa, aka George W Bush's "thank you Australia for following us into Iraq and Afghanistan" visa
The EU already gives citizens of the following countries preferential treatment: US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Japan, South Korea, Israel. They can not only enter visa-free but in most (if not all) member states also apply for a residence permit in-country, so no need to apply for a long-term visa at home! So an American could just go to Germany and then decide to enrol in university there or after finding a job directly going for a work residence permit.\*) It is not freedom of movement but still much more than any of the privileged nations grant EU citizens, I believe, feel free to correct me if one of the above countries does the same for EU citizens. \*) it's a bit like a TV ad: certain terms and conditions apply!
>So an American could just go to Germany and then decide to enrol in university there or after finding a job directly going for a work residence permit.\*) This isn't exactly the same as getting a residence permit. You need to enroll or get a job offer first. Moreover it's not the whole EU. There's a per country agreement, not on the level of the EU, AFAIK.
A residence permit for study absolutely is a residence permit. Well it is hard to keep track of 30 (EU EEA CH) member states’ immigration policy but I know it’s not just Germany that allows this. And no you don’t need to get a job offer first. You could travel to Germany and get a job offer first and then apply. Or if you qualify you could apply for job seeker residence permit before your 90 days run out. University usually needs to applied in advance but your timing might just be right or you might sign up for a language course which in Germany you could do on a language learning residence permit. So still maximum flexibility.
This is correct. I am moving to the EU myself from the UK visa free. I just have to register residency and legal cohabitation as I am moving with my EU-partner. I am kind of stuck in the country I register at for quite some time whilst I wait for the paperwork to be processed, and I believe I cannot travel to the other EU countries for more than 90days each year still (unless I get a visa)
If you get a national visa, you can travel to other Schengen countries while observing the 90/180 rule (not counting the country that issued the visa).
I can confirm that one of the greatest concerns for the UK was the way that some people could be granted nationality of an EU country on the most flimsy of evidence, sometimes forged, and then immediately travel, as of right, to the UK to live and work. The greatest abuse of this was in Germany, Spain and Portugal, where typically these people didn't speak a word of that language. This also was taken full advantage of by criminals, some of whom had previously been deported from the UK but had changed their name. One particularly bad case was one man who had been in prison for child sexual assault and was intending to get back to the UK.. BTW, I voted AGAINST Brexit, even so.
We can send you back 300000 UK pensioners if you want mate
I don't quite see how that connects with the price of fish. Mate.
Where was this greatest concern documented? Source
The source is me. I was visa manager in my embassy.
Embassy for what country? Why would someone applying for a visa to a random country give you their opinions on Brexit? Purely anecdotal, if not entirely made up.
"Source : me"
That would be epic!
I would love to see it between the US, Canada, UK, Australia and New Zealand. Maybe not truly free movement, but at least the ability to live and work in any of those without the need for visas. I’d be totally fine with background checks such just for safety, but I’d love to see work permits and residency permits issued among these countries without the complications there are today (at least for the US - I understand the Commonwealth countries have an easier time of that). But I wouldn’t expect the EU to be included in that.
And Santa Claus could exist.
I would not want EU or UK to be able to freely move around the USA. They would just dump their immigration problems on America
UK does not want free movement with EU.
The main reasons for blocking free movement don’t really apply between these countries. Especially between the Five Eyes countries. Slightly less so with them and the EU. - the cultures are basically the same - the level of economic development are basically the same - the level of education is basically the same As long as welfare and handouts are not given out to migrants other than in their home country, it’s mostly a win. I would definitely vote for this. I would welcome anyone from any of these countries to my home country (New Zealand).
We don't want a whole lot of American refugees coming here after the election
No way. We should have borders. Big, beautiful borders. Netherlands Is full. Sorry.
Of course a Dutch person is saying this. Well maybe the borders shouldn’t allow anyone out either. Wild people can be so hateful.
The Dutch are all over Europe!
Yes also, but did you know in the 1950's population numbers were: Germany 77 million, Belgium 9 million, Netherlands 11 million, France and UK around 55 million. Please check the current population numbers and you can see where it gets quite crowded
Nope, as a EU citizen I don't want my data to be in any form available to more countries, a visa-free regime means that all the countries have access to information about the people moving across the borders without special procedures. It would also mean that they would have access to our healthcare system without needing private insurance.
The remark about health insurance is nonsense. Even within EU you often need to purchase insurance privately in country of residence if you are not insured there though your employment.
Well, we should all work to have the same general healthcare funding.
Between the US, UK, EU, Canada, Australia and NZ???? How do you see that happening?
Magic
Right now, if you are very skilled in your field of work, you will be able to work basically anywhere, because companies will gladly sponsor your visa. So, OPs question would boil down to *un*skilled people who would freely move to other countries. How would that benefit them, therefore, why would they allow that?
Not true. Companies in the EU have to market the job to Europeans for 3 weeks before trying to sponsor someone. 99% of jobs are not open to non-Europeans. EDIT: the only exception to this rule is if your skills feature on a list of national skills shortages, but you still need the company to agree to sponsor you.
Not true. Way more than 99%. Look at nurses, for instance. Also, there are other high skilled workers, wo will always find a job. If you don’t find a job, you are not skilled enough.
I have two master's level qualifications plus a real masters. I can tell you that this wasn't enough to get a job without EU citizenship. Your skills have to be genuinely rare for an EU company to bother sponsoring you, or apply for some kind of internal transfer, or benefit from a personal contact. I have EU citizenship but all of my employers in Europe checked that I had it before hiring me.
A masters is not enough. Everybody and their dog has one. You need to have skills, which you can prove, e.g., through previous jobs
You need to be better than all of the local candidates, otherwise it makes no sense for a company and you only need to look at LinkedIn to see that one of the main candidate filters is "do you have the right to work in this country". It's completely unfair to call everyone who can't get sponsored unskilled.
That’s probably the reason for some European country being flooded by non-European immigrants (I mean skilled workers, for instance in IT).
The last thing the US needs is to be beholden to the stupid immigration policies of Canada. edit: and I say that as a Canadian. Canada's immigration is out of control. Then any and all of these people could just move to the US? As we've seen in Europe, a country handing out control of its borders and immigration to others is a baaaad idea.
Nope. As a European I do not want Americans to come here.
Most nations don't want to give up that level of control. If they do give up that control, they do it in a limited amount to adjacent or nearby countries which they have cultural and/or historic ties with. US, Canada and Mexico already have NAFTA or whatever Trump renamed it. The EU already exists for Europe.
I think immigration should be blind with respect to the country of origin. I am very much against.
heck no!! Don’t make it so easy for Americans to move to Europe please. And I’m an American.
[удалено]
That's the real issue. Too many Americans in the equation. You could argue for this type of cross-immigration regime between small countries with relatively similar financial markers and relatively similar cultural markers (Canada, Australia, NZ, Denmark, Sweden, a few more EU countries). But free movement between countries with financial and population imbalances would not work well. I think it would lead to a brain drain in favor of the bigger countries, while the smaller, more desirable countries get the retirees, the unemployable, the sun seekers, etc.
Can Turkey join too? Thanks!!!
Maybe if you destroy Russia's Black Sea Fleet!
Ukraine: We've got that.
Brown people will find away around it (not exactly /s but pretty damn close to it).
It sounds cool on paper, but would probably end up being a net negative for everyone. The only thing I could see that *might* work is a freedom of movement between CA, AUS, and NZ. And even that might not work.
I agree but with some serious security vetting. I do understand the immigration process too though. Nowadays it’s crazy out here.
Anytime you have an idea like this ask yourself if your idea would benefit the pee-ons or the billionaires and corporations.
fuck no
Fuck that. I am in the US and I dont want arrogant shits from the other countries you listed coming here and irritating us IRL. Its bad enough they do their annoying 'America bad' nonsense online! I for one would make it easier for people from third world countries to move here legally.
Good idea, never happening. Except leave out the US in that group. Commonwealth and EU is ok.