A Growing Problem

It has become apparent to me through a fellow blogger that the crisis currently striking American citizens has been far worse in many places, and beyond what most common media will inform you of. The problem is, we do not have a national standard for what immigration and visitation to countries should be. We have been allowing our homes, our land, and our families to be assaulted by the mass of immigration piling into our countries, and it has been doing a great deal of damage to our societies, our economies, and the residents ability for which to procure a good honest wage. We have mistaken generosity and the extension of a helping hand for the absolute desecration of our countries values and the well being of our people. This is not just an issue within America, but has, thanks to a blog written by a fellow blogger, been spread across nations with haphazard ideals of the outcome.


My idea for how we could fix this, and I know I probably won’t live long enough to see the idea implemented in my own country, let alone across the globe, is simple.


1.) In order to enter another country, one must first procure a visitors visa. Visitors visa can be obtained for the following :

Common tourism, maximum of 2 weeks.

Work related visitation in which one must have the following details for said work related visitation : how it is related to work, how long the work related visit is expected to last, visitor has 24 hours within work related visit to go back to their country of origin.

Schooling related, in which one must already have a acceptance letter into said school and a pre-destined location at which said individual will be residing while in the country. Individual must provide either grades that prove student is learning the materials for which they are studying, or show excellence within the curriculum in which their main field of study is. Students must also do something in some way shape or form to benefit the community and that countries economy. (IE Working a part time job, getting a full time job that is willing to work around their schooling, do an internship within the field they are studying)

Visitation with intent to immigrate, these individuals must have an appointment set up with the immigration office prior to making the plan to visit and upon landing must go directly to said immigration office in order to get the paperwork started. These visitors will have a maximum of a 6 month stay, in which they can show their desire to flourish within the country and help the countries economy. Any infraction against the countries laws, or inability to assimilate into the countries infrastructure due to laziness would result in immediate deportation. They will have 6 month maximum so that they can either show they are willing to integrate into the culture and learn their native tongue as well as build a life for themselves, or prove that they are not to be allowed. Individuals who fail to become apart of the society will be further blacklisted from any other attempts to visit said country.


2.) Those applying for a visitors visa, regardless of the type, must undergo a background check. Any who have infractions such as rape, murder, theft, arson, abuse (child or domestic), or anything of the likes would be denied. The only case in which there would be an exception is if murder was done in self-defense, and not a repeat offender.


3.) Any person or persons wanting to obtain a visitors visa must first learn the language. They must know how to read, write, and speak the native tongue for the nation they are visiting. Those who cannot, will be denied. One may re-apply once every 3 months.


4.) People of aggressive or vindictive religious or mental ideologies will not be permitted to visit countries in which have people that believe in or have disparaging views from the person applying for said visa. Such information would be obtained through a background check. Example being if a fundamentalist Mormon had extreme malcontent towards those of Jewish faith wanted to visit Israel, their application would thusly be rejected.


5.) If a country does not have the space, jobs, or social economic prosperity necessary for one to immigrate to a country, but are looking for somewhere to make a permanent residence, the application for visitation will be denied but should offer realistic options for possible relocation that would not damage the country or its people.


8 thoughts on “A Growing Problem

    • Yes, it goes for any and all countries. If I wanted to go to Italy, I would have to learn Italian so that I could read, write, and speak their language. Perhaps not as fluently as they do, but as one progresses in speaking with an Italian, one begins to pick up and understand how to better and more appropriately communicate.

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Thanks for referencing my blog post on this. I have to say that British people are some of the worst at bothering to learn the native language of another non-English speaking host nation. This is particularly the case amongst all the ‘expat’ retirees in France and Spain, who are getting frightened about the prospect of the UK leaving the EU. In this instance, the issue is economic: are they are burden on the publicly-funded health care in their host nation and will they be a burden on the UK if they return? In both cases, the overall effect should be neutral as where they reside determines where they spend their pension income.


    Liked by 1 person

    • That is actually partly why I have it stated that should there not be jobs, housing, etc that could support said immigration of the individual(s), that another option that has said necessities should be granted.

      What would help is if we could convert nations that are far from being prosperous into prospering nations because most non-prosperous lands have limited amounts of people because the land cannot support it. If we taught agriculture, science, mathematics, as well as architecture, we could potentially open up many places for those in search of asylum to go. It would whittle down on the overcrowding of nations and help the world as a whole.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Agreed. In the EU the poorest countries, the former Soviet Bloc and historically also Portugal and Greece receive the highest amount of infrastructure funding. OK, but those countries, especially Poland, the largest recipient, also have the highest levels of migration to the wealthier countries.

        To me it should be an either / or: we can afford to finance their infrastructures but not to take in millions of their immigrants; or the other way round, but I think the former would be better as it would reduce the demand to migrate in the first place.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Completely agree, if we actually helped to build up instead of take in their immigrants, we could help them as a country, as a nation, and that would help the rest of the world because they wouldn’t have their residents fleeing constantly. There are places which are instead of increasing in population, are decreasing due to the lack of standard in living. If we could fix that, help them grow and expand, that would make the lives of the residents better and the land could be prosperous. This whole idea of just taking in refugees from countries instead of resolving the reason these refugees are needing to leave only causes more problems than it really solves. At best, we should only take a certain amount of refugees, teach them how to take care of their home land then send them back so they can help their own people and their land.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s