In Denmark, the government officially publishes reports on the economic contribution of immigrants by country of origin and how much money the government has spent on them. The Danish-language report contains hundreds of charts, but I’ve translated one chart for you, for example, from this report.
It seems to state the obvious that people actively fleeing violence aren’t net contributors to government revenues but as they settle they begin to contribute until they eventually become net contributors.
Silit235 on
Is that YUG, Yugoslavia, hadn’t seen that country for a long time in official statistics.
WeirdEquivalentx on
Lots of countries in NATO and countries bombed by NATO in the same chart!
rury_williams on
does this take into account baturalized citizens?
BicycleGripDick on
Finally something that belongs in economy
ProneToGlory on
Looks like Denmark is having to invest in a lot of communities from the southern hemisphere because a lot of those states don’t have the infrastructure to invest in them now.
In a way, it’s reparations. That’s an opinion though, not trying to argue that.
I’d like to see the same chart in another 3-5 decades. Denmark doesn’t have a high enough replacement rate and the investments may well pay off, or could just be a sunk cost.
Tldr; I think it’s a good representation of the Nordic model of investing into the community, and that it’s too early to tell if any of these immigrant communities on right are net negative economic impact on the county. As gross as that is to type out
6 Comments
What’s your goal with this chart?
It seems to state the obvious that people actively fleeing violence aren’t net contributors to government revenues but as they settle they begin to contribute until they eventually become net contributors.
Is that YUG, Yugoslavia, hadn’t seen that country for a long time in official statistics.
Lots of countries in NATO and countries bombed by NATO in the same chart!
does this take into account baturalized citizens?
Finally something that belongs in economy
Looks like Denmark is having to invest in a lot of communities from the southern hemisphere because a lot of those states don’t have the infrastructure to invest in them now.
In a way, it’s reparations. That’s an opinion though, not trying to argue that.
I’d like to see the same chart in another 3-5 decades. Denmark doesn’t have a high enough replacement rate and the investments may well pay off, or could just be a sunk cost.
Tldr; I think it’s a good representation of the Nordic model of investing into the community, and that it’s too early to tell if any of these immigrant communities on right are net negative economic impact on the county. As gross as that is to type out