Ok, now you've totally lost me. Where did Fukushima come in? What scenes are there to be behind? What bullshit do you refer to?

Hard to understand without knowing German politics and the official reactions to certain events.

Obviously no sense in talking to you, keep your lack of respect and manners to yourself, thank you.

Now we know the hidden agenda here in Sweden. The police wants moar police says our national police chief. Moar! 2,500 more police that is.

Jokes aside turns out it's such a troubling situation for the police handling our immigrants, refugees and the escalating terror threat level (The last one is just scare tactics from the police to get more funds though would be my guess.) that our national police chief say he needs 2,500 more police and 1,600 more civic employees so that other job tasks won't suffer.

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/rikspolischefen-kraver-fler-poliser

Woah there. You used the word "bullshit". I was genuinely asking what you were referring to.

My first reaction to the latest posts ....rofl.
Sorry, can't help it.
I know, I know. But the USA behind Wonder Woman (aka Merkel)?
Like you said, she always acts if she gains something. At the time she said her famous words "Wir schaffen Das"
it was because "the people" were in favor for those helpless people. As most of her decisions it wasn't very well thought out. Than the power struggle started. And now its a lose lose situation. She knows that she can't stop it. Her only hope are the turks closing their border. Every European option is wishful thinking.

But than again...maybe the USA is the big puppeteer.
I mean...first they destabilize the middle east and now they do the same with Europe.
Russia is close to bankruptcy, Chinas big plans for major player are on hold......whats left? OK, the USA have more debt than all other countries together...but hey they just print more $$...
Yes, its a secret plan from the USA and their next president Mr. Trump!!!

Sorry, I misunderstood you there, I'd have written the word with " " if it's supposed to be a quote of a single word, don't know if this is the usual way in English, but I thought so.

I was referring to her contradictory actions.
The CDU is tighly entangled in the nuclear power lobby, so her reaction towards Fukushima was entirely for public relations to stay in power, they still try to cater to their lobby too though of course but it has become increasingly difficult and you can't let the population that is mostly against nuclear power for a very long time know about it and can't continue as usual. It wasn't a very nice event for the conservatives.
When it comes to handling immigrants, the CDU is mostly very nationalistic and are known for wanting closed borders and expulsing more people. They even made children that were born here and just at least wanted to finish their Abitur leave. If the CDU is opening borders, it's always connected to a plan that is more important than their usual reactionary ways but they are seldomly/never honest about it. The CDU/CSU's connections to US government and US corporations have been very tight ever since WW2 and Merkel also wanted to participate in the invasion or Iraq and would have done so if her party would have been in power back then (which would have destabilized Germany and the EU even more).
With those people it's always about a balance of catering to their lobbies/corporations, the US government and last but not least the German population, which sadly is the least important group since many of those don't vote anyway and the huge amount of money spent on pro-CDU propaganda is doing the rest. Needless to say, that the high management of the official radio and tv stations is a staff of people from the two biggest parties in the country: CDU and (the by now not so very different) SPD. The resulting decisions are mostly being kept secret and every event (world cups, wars, even a new born polar bear in a zoo in Berlin a while ago ffs etc...) gets used to distract the public from important decisions (like TTIP atm).
Keeping the peasants at each others throats with this ridiculous left vs. right dichotomy is practically always a major part of all this. This is how German politics work.

BTW: Wasn't Merkel handled as a potential winner of the nobel peace price not long ago? Stuff like this and this may be part of all of it.

As one female asylum worker got murdered yesterday, I think it's a good time to link the articles of two German female workers who describe their work (you'll need google translate):

First one:
http://www.welt.de/print/wams/hamburg/article151089911/Ich-halte-es-nicht-mehr-aus.html

Second one:
http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article151343117/Mich-nervt-die-sture-Borniertheit-vieler-Maenner.html

English article about the killed worker:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3416343/Sweden-asylum-worker-22-stabbed-death-frenzied-attack-CHILD-migrant-centre-refugee-boy-15-arrested-murder.html

The answer to the problems of Germany's future probably lie in the past.

Quick study of German unification. Just replace the Catholic church with Islam and you get the same idea. An entirely new socioeconomic body is currently forming in the womb of Europe. Watching you guys deal with the impending birth of Abiz Al-Salam Frankenstein is interesting. I'm taking notes.

German Unification (Part II: Bismarck's Realpolitik)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z-zY9YpQIk

I didn't mention this because I'd put this more up to our current housing crisis. Sweden have a very serious housing crisis so when it comes to housing people like immigrants and refugees we cram them into whatever we can find. At one point we even had a tent camp for them. If you cram different people together like that you're going to get trouble. No matter from what country or culture they're from.
Blame right wing politics instead that doesn't want to encourage cheap housing being built because the housing businesses won't make as much money on cheap housing and living.

Or maybe zoning regulations and rent control which artificially reduce supply and make it relatively unprofitable for real estate developers to be interested in building new units. ;) Which goes a way to explain why higher margin luxury housing investments become more appealing than smaller and theoretically easier (lower costs, higher demand) investments with lower margins.

That's because everyone wants to build in or around the big cities. Sweden have so much empty space there's no need for that.
Besides all the right wing wants to do is to build in attractive and environment protected places like coasts.

-We need more housing. Let's make it easier to build on beaches!
-What about all the forest surrounding the community?
-No beaches so we can build expensive flashy houses!
-But we need more cheap housing not villas.
-Alright alright let's also raise the noise limit for new buildings so you can build cheap and small apartments beside the airports, highway, and factories. Happy now?

That's the discussion in a nutshell. It's like a Monty Python sketch.

Edit: Also there's barely any small and cheap houses being sold. It's very very hard to find someone that can build it for you. It's a growing market but the big house builders do not want that. They have a ridiculous profit margin that most other businesses would kill for. And all that is because they practically only build expensive housing.

this is a vastly different picture from the one you get outside germany of germany's administration

Out of pure curiosity (not trying to judge your opinion or whatever) how do you envision the public funding of housings on a big scale (it would be like a new town) and the financial support of migrants (before they "integrate" and have a positive effect in an economic sense) on a 5-years time schedule?

Naturally, for the same amount of population (around 11millions), Sweden has big advantage over Belgium as you have only half of the public debt that we have (around 212billions $ VS. around 438billions $).

Edit: I'm keeping it to public funding as the housings would be considered "social housings" for people living primarly on social welfare (if it's like in Belgium where you can keep your social house if you work but then your rent is adjusted)

But there are places to build. Problem is that every builder there is wants to build in expensive places or build expensive housings. It's the builders keeping the prices up by refusing to build everywhere the municipality say they can. Expensive housing means much more profit.

And the higher level isn't working. People buy on it because they often have no choice. It's making the swedish people being maybe even the western population with the highest personal debt.

The thing that caused this was probably the state and municipalities cutting costs any way they can in conjunction with short sighted stupidity.
We HAD a lot of cheap and good housing but they was told to cut as much expenses as they could. So they for the most part just tore down empty buildings and only sold a couple. It was obvious that after a while we would need those buildings again but they didn't care.
So suddenly the building companies could do as they bloody well wanted because everyone else is desperate for housing.

There have been discussions about what you say here in Sweden. Everyone except die hard market liberals seems to agree it would be too risky to try your suggestions. It's not that easy unfortunately here.

But we are sorta on topic. The housing crisis was a important reason the immigrant wave got critical here.