Due to refugees, Sweden now has higher boy to girl ratio than CHINA. Did Sweden make a mistake?

Migrant crisis means Sweden now has a higher ratio of teenage boys-to-girls than CHINA. For every girl that arrived, 11.3 boys also arrived. Crime is way up and there is a clash of cultures now. Sweden is now curtailing migration. Did they make a mistake or not?

  • This is good for Sweden
    Vote A
  • This will have no effect
    Vote B
  • This is bad for Sweden
    Vote C
Select a gender to cast your vote:
I'm a GirlI'm a Guy
Sweden has announced now that they will expel up to 80,000 refugees:



Most Helpful Guy

  • I think a lot of Europe made a mistake when they took in all those immigrants now they're coming out of the woodwork and trying to get into any place they can over there. I'm telling you it's going to be France all over again, over there.

    • By France are you referencing the Paris attack? You have to understand that these "refugees" were criminals with the intent to inflict harm and kill. There are thousands of refugees who desperately need to flee away from tyrannical and oppressive governments as well as conflict and economic downturn. Immigrants are what will keep Europe and countries like Japan afloat in the future. The few bad apples shouldn't spoil the bunch. Going off of your logic, it would make sense to ban all domestic immigration as well, from the urban (central business district areas) to suburban areas. Like with your argument, the aforementioned argument overgeneralizes and discriminates an entire population due to over extension of cherry picked instances.

    • @Icyfire101 France left itself open to attack by letting in millions of Muslims to the point were they had/have areas/all Muslim communities known as no go zones were people like cops and firemen were afraid to go into. Couple that with their lax security that allowed terrorists to get into the country and smuggle weapons in. A lot of other places are doing the exact same thing and the result will be the same.

      Say what you will about my argument or whatever you think this is, but France left itself vulnerable and open to attack, and the rest of Europe is doing the same, and I am not saying that no one should let them in but security needs to be massively increased and they need to be thinned out so that they are not there in overwhelming numbers they need to be spread out. And they aren't doing themselves any favors either by breaking into countries that aren't letting them in like Macedonia.

    • Your first comment was incorrect. According to research done by the Pew Research Center, the vast majority of Muslims in France are secular, away from their religion. Using common sense, "Muslim communities" do not exist in places where the Muslim population is widely dispersed and largely secular. The same study states that the 3 million Muslims in France are actually from Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia, all three of which are not considered nations hostile to the West and are not known for housing terrorists. No credible source explicitly states that there are Muslim communities that police are afraid to enter. I am actually familiar to what you are citing, and that was actually a statement by a Fox News anchor who stated that these communites existed in England. It was proven false. And this "thinning out" is very similar to the Roman Diaspora and very similar to what Adolf Hitler did to the Jews. Do we really want anything close to repeat of that?

Have an opinion?

What Girls Said 2

  • Why would it be different to having a higher girl to boy ratio?

    • Most of the immigrants are men that's why.

    • Show All
    • @Icyfire101 I would remove a lot of them. i would not take chances with the lives of my neighbors. The stakes are too high they need to go home. Their home is a mess because of their culture, I won't expose my family and neighbors to that. They can go home and straighten their own country out. I doubt that we will see eye to eye on this so this will be my last comment.

    • The issue with that is that these countries have corrupt governments intent on harming its citizens to exert supreme control over everyone under them. There is nothing they can do to fix their countries. The corrupt government officials rose to power in illegitimate ways, either through force, falsification of votes, etc. But I think choosing sides in this debate depends on an individual's personal political views and perspectives on morality, so it's nearly impossible to reach an end. It might just be best to agree to disagree at this point.

  • I thought I read a report where Sweden is no longer letting refugees in and won't allow every refugee that has come to Sweden to stay

    • This question was written before Sweden and Germany wised up. Sweden is refusing many of the "refugees" but I do not onow yet if they won't allow any refugees to come. Germany has though changed and said that the refugees cannot stay and must go back after the war in Syria ends. Germany's Liberal Chancellor is under pressure to resign as this was her idea to bring them in as 40% of German's now say she should resign. I just read that Germany is doubling the police for a canival this week given all of the problems.

      It looks like Trump was right in saying that there needs to be a temporary ban on people coming from certain countries. The Swedes and Germans wouldnhave been better off had they followed that advice, now they have sexual assualts going to extreme levels.

What Guys Said 1

  • No Sweden is in stage 5 of the Demographic Transition Model so its population is already expected to decrease. The natural Birth rate will equal that of its death rate. Immigration is actually the only way to have a stable source of suitable youth population able to support the cradle to grave social welfare system found in socialist Scandinavian countries once the current generation, which is having fewer kids than previous generations, ages and retires. Europe desperately needs refugees from stage 2 and 3 countries, which generally have larger youth and young adult populations in order to have a stable welfare system and maintain its economy,

    • So, to answer the question at hand, no. Sweden did not make a mistake.

    • Show All
    • You are welcome. Your writing amd thought process is superb for your age. I say that as an F100 executive, so that is saying something. I do think that you are missing the gravity of the culture clash that is coming. The Swedes would have been better off bring in people from nations such as Mexico or elsewhere in Latin America to subsize their social programs for the next generation or two. (I will need to log off now however. )

    • I would love to discuss this issue with you at a later date, so, if possible, follow me back. All countries have their own set of problems that are prevalent for that region. Mexico and a large portion of Central and South America are undergoing a drug usage crisis and an expanding black market. Using your earlier extension of immigrants bringing in problems, Bringing in Mexicans would introduce drugs and an underground economy, which is completely illogical. You also have to factor in differing governments. I agree Syria's government is not stable. But once you put citizens under a stable government, it has been proven through history that many issues that divide populations quell, as a stable government with popularity is a centripetal force for a state.