Belgium: The Myth of “Economic Growth” through Integration

Third World immigration does not contribute to building European economies, but is actually a burden on the economy, a new report from Belgium’s Vlaams Belang party has revealed.

According to a series of articles released by the populist, anti-immigration, anti-EU Flemish separatist party, “crippling unemployment rates among immigrants” are always blamed on ‘racism’ and ‘exclusion’ but this is just a feint designed to blame Europeans.


The VB article points out that most other nations (apart from the US, which is being overrun with Mexican illegals) have restrictive and selective immigration policies.

“We [in Belgium] get the low-level and unskilled workers,” the article said, pointing out that this has become even more of a problem because multinational industrial activities have largely relocated their factories to low-wage countries such as China.

Moreover, low-skilled migrants in the US and [elsewhere] do not have the same extensive welfare net to fall back on, as they do in Belgium.

“In Belgium, the social safety net has, for many migrants, become a hammock,” the article said, adding that this situation does not “invite self-reliance and integration.”

Furthermore, there is no “multicultural enrichment” either, unless one counts rising crime,  intolerance against “infidels”, forced marriages, headscarves and burkas, honor killings, or genital mutilation of girls and women as a positive contribution, the VB article said.

“The Central Planning Bureau in the Netherlands calculated that an average immigrant costs 230,000 euros in welfare, while contributing 226,000 euros.

“The newsmagazine Elsevier calculated the total cost of immigration in the Netherlands was currently at 200 billion euros, and research organization Nyfar said that immigration of non-Western immigrants cost 7.2 billion euros per year.

“Economists suggest that immigration benefits us, but there is no profit in it, because they too often rely on benefits and cause welfare costs to increase.

“Others say it is a solution to the problem of an aging population. Nonsense!”

Dutch economist Van Dalen has proven that it is “fooling the people” to present immigration as a solution to the aging population problem.

“A simple calculation quickly makes clear that immigration in such colossal numbers will create new problems which will overshadow the old ones.

“Van Dalen calculated that under this false scenario, the Netherlands would have a population of 109 million inhabitants by 2100. And yet there are in the EU and the UN to find fools who advocate such a scenario: the importation of millions of new immigrants.

“It is collective suicide … And we have not even mentioned the social problems. Mass immigration undermines the cohesion of society and creates increasing segregation and crime. Where are the famous ‘benefits’?”

Van Dalen showed that the answer was educating our own people as a cheaper option than importing immigrants.

“Why then do some employers and leftist churches—a bizarre unholy alliance between ‘big business’ and the immigration lobby—still demand open borders?”

Recommended For You


  1. Whether migrants contribute positively to their new western country of domicile is a moot point.
    In the UK, it is regularly heard that migrants, “….on balance…” contribute positively and are a financial benefit to the UK. Nowhere have I seen any figures supporting this assertion which actually flies in the face of any ‘gut feeling’ and actually, common sense.
    I would like to think that my own common sense tells me that with all the public services the migrants share (quite apart from generous benefits) and all the rest of it, the annual costs associated with their support would create a large imbalance toward the negative. The advocates of positivity, “….on balance….” cannot control the media publication of facts as they become available. Not long back we heard in the UK that of the Somali Muslims in the UK, virtually all, (both male and female) are unemployed and always have been.
    Take for example the Governments announcement that in will be necessary to increase the number of officers in M15 as a result of the increase in Muslim terrorism. Without more research, I believe the figure of 1200 was mentioned. All to deal with the Muslims and their terrorism. I recall a similar exercise some years ago and the need to recruit a similar number. Do these additional employment costs appear on the Double Entry system of accounting against migration (if one exists)? I’ll bet they don’t! And many similar services can be added to most European States’ annual budget including the UK.
    I see it this way, if there was some tangible figures to support the claim of ANY “benefit”, a Government would be anxious to publish it, wouldn’t they?

    In a similar vein, we hear the expression, “Radicalisation” (of SOME Muslims) often used. The corresponding explanation for, “radical” in the Oxford English Dictionary in the context of extremism is, “advocating thorough reform; holding extreme political views; left-wing, revolutionary”.

    In my humble view anyone who prays, as a Muslim, four or five times a day and on occasions as early as 0400 Hrs in the morning does’nt need further, ‘radicalisation’, He/she is already ‘radicalised’! Take a look at the Quaran. It does not need a devout adherent to understand that it spouts hate and violence and death. That’s why the Muslim “culture” cannot ever grow to be compatible with the West. Splitting atoms, endeavouring to eventually put men on Mars and even further, the growth of other scientific achievements: the Muslim doesn’t have it – their way of life is retrograde.
    My father spent 22 years in the British Army which embraced the Second World War. I’ve got some photographs of his Regiment in peculiar “armoured cars” chasing Afghan “terrorists” around the mountain passes well before 1939. The point is, nothing changes for the Muslim. They are stuck in time. In some respects I’m glad my father is not alive to see the problems of Governmental gross mismanagement in respect of “multiculturalism”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.