The new trend in Scandinavia is immigration through a new form of scam:

You send your kids first, who get classified as "alone refugee children", and once they get a permit to stay permanently, they suddenly "find their family by accident" and bring them here within a couple of years.

Ask yourself, how else could a lonely child be able to afford $10,000 to pay to smugglers to get from Afrika or Middle East all the way up to Scandinavia (funny too that they were wise enough not to seek asylum right at the EU border lol)? Usually according to these children's own testimonies when they seek asylum, they're 'war-children' who 'lost all of their relatives' and have no one that takes care of them.

This is a huge industry, and a big scam. They're just tricking the authorities, and we accept it.
(but media is like media always is, so 98% of the Swedish public actually believes that these kids are in great need and have no parents or adult close relatives!)

Sweden was one of the first countries in late 90's to get this "lone child"-phenomenon, but now the trend has spread to our neigbors in Norway who in the last few years has made it's immigration policy the most generous in Europe due to all it's oil money and naive mentality (yes, these kind of rumours of where to best seek asylum spread like wildfire among 'refugees"):

A new record of 930 "lone refugee children" came to the little nation Norway in the first four months of 2009, which hints at a total of almost 3000 for the whole year (compared to 403 in 2007 and 1 374 in 2008). Guess how many thousands of siblings and parents migrating that will generate within a couple of years? Stupid mothers...

Sorry no good source as this is in Swedish n Norwegian:
http://meritwager.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/unga-utan-skyddsskal-gommer-sig-nar-de-far-avslag-pa-sina-asylansokningar/
http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/aid/pressesenter/pressemeldinger/2009/etablering-av-omsorgstilbud-i-enslige-as.html?id=565347



Note that Norway only has 4.8 million inhabitants, so while 3000 'poor lil children' per year and their ~10,000 siblings & parents may not sound much, but if it was translated to UK conditions it would mean 40,000 children and 130,000 people including their families - and if it was the USA it would correspond to 180,000 'war children" and ½ million people including families per year - generated from the "lone refugee children" phenomenon/scam alone!


Note also: Now you mite also ask: how on earth can we avoid this? You must believe a child! Easy: there's such a thing as 'temporary permit to stay' instead of 'permantent permit to stay' (terrible translation I know) but it's just not common praxis to use that in Sweden, only rarely it is used.
(while in immigration-restrictive countries like Denmark and Finland it actually is very common - u get a permit to stay until the conflict in ur country is over, then you're out)

One of the advantages of open borders and immigration is people can move to pursue the jobs much easier, in addition nations and companies can easily obtain the workers they need at the skill and wage levels they are looking for.

I didnt even know those countries like Sweden had immigration problems, i thought it was just Germany France and England.

i suppose yes but only really until the original country is actually stable again

Yes. Hell yes.

I'm even for declaring an amnesty for all illegal immigrants in this country.

Contrary to popular belief, immigrants (on the whole) give more in taxation then they take in welfare, they contribute more per-person to the UK economy than it's "native" citizens, and it's providing most of the immigrants with a much better standard of living than they're currently receiving.

It's also basic economic theory that you need more people to have sustainable economic growth.

Yeah, I find it ludicrous that the people in America who are the most "pro-market" are also the most "anti-immigration." Its a rationally indefensible position when you look at how economies work.

That's laughable. In the US it may be so, but not in most of Europe. 

And I guess u as a typical liberal aren't aware of any other costs associated with immigration other than 'wellfare' expenses.

I wasn't referring to "most of Europe" I was referring to the UK, you know, like the rest of my post.

Immigration has its downsides, sure, but those are far surpassed by the benefits it brings not only to the country, but also to the individuals who are immigrating. Of course, you, as a typical conservative, aren't aware of, or just plain ignore this.

You just summarised immigration in a nutshell.

Good. If it were bad the government wouldn't let it happen legally.

Outside of refugees every once in a while.