The Swiss voice in the world since 1935
Personal feed

Sign in to add topics to your feed.

Sign in now
Bookmarks

Sign in to add articles to your saved list.

Sign in now

Should the Swiss population be capped at 10 million?

Hosted by:

I manage a multilingual team responsible for covering the Swiss Abroad, providing them with the information they need to participate in political life in Switzerland. After studying political science in Neuchâtel and Bern, I started out in multimedia journalism at SwissTXT and RTS. Since 2008, I've been working at SWI swissinfo.ch, where I've held various journalistic and management positions.

There are more than nine million people living in Switzerland. The Through a people’s initiative, the Swiss People’s Party wants to cap the Swiss population to not more than 10 million residents until 2050.

More

How many people do you think Switzerland can realistically host? What alternatives to immigration do you envisage to ensure there are enough skilled workers? And do you see Swiss population growth as an opportunity or a threat?

Join the conversation!

Contributions must adhere to our guidelines. If you have questions or wish to suggest other ideas for debates, please, get in touch!
M
Myrtha
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

The skills shortage did not arise because too few Swiss people were interested in various jobs and foreigners were therefore needed, but primarily because, in recent years, there have been excessive cutbacks in the workforce among the lower-paid workers, resulting in inhumane and poorly paid working conditions!__This is particularly true in the care sector, service professions, retail, the hospitality industry and the skilled trades.__Although the Care Initiative was passed, nothing has changed so far!

Der Fachkräftemangel entstand nicht daraus, dass zu wenig Schweizer an diversen Arbeiten interessiert wären und es daher Ausländer benötigt, sondern vor allem auch dadurch, dass in der unteren Arbeiterklassen in den letzten Jahren zu stark Arbeitskräfte eingespart wurden und dadurch unmenschliche und auch zu schlecht bezahlte Verhältnisse geschaffen wurden!__Dies vor allem in den Berufen Pflege, Dienstleistungsberufe, Verkauf, Gastronomie und Handwerk.__Die Pflegeinitiative wurde zwar angenommen aber geändert wurde bisher nichts!

R
Ratgeber
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

As a German, I can only say: ‘Yes, that’s right.’ You can see what’s become of us. In the long run, the same thing will happen to you too.

Als Deutscher kann ich nur sagen stimmt mit Ja. Ihr seht ja was aus uns geworden ist. Das gleiche wird langfristig auch euch treffen.

R
Rafiq Tschannen

The reason I voted no are mainly two: (1) we need young immigrants to pay into our social security system, otherwise the over aging Swiss population cannot continue to receive a nice pension and (2) there are other ways to regulate work permits etc. If the freedom of movement system with EU is cancelled many Swiss working and living in EU countries willl suffer too.

D
Daniel Beccar
The following contribution has been automatically translated from ES.

I think it’s very important to limit the population to no more than 10 million; Switzerland doesn’t have enough space, and in some areas it’s already becoming really difficult to live.

Creo que es muy importante limitar la población a no mas de 10 millones,Suiza no tiene espacio suficiente y ya en algunas zonas realmente se pone difícil vivir.

J
jepyerly@websud.ch
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.

Every day, the press and TSR are undermining the SVP initiative through articles and carefully selected interviews. These are people who refuse to acknowledge the problems posed by overpopulation, which is detrimental to the well-being of families, affordable rents, natural and well-maintained landscapes, and the local supply of food and drinking water. A better distribution of businesses and populations across the world should take precedence over concentration in one or a few countries. What are all these international organisations doing, more inclined towards weapons than towards solutions for peace and well-being on our planet Earth?

Chaque jour, la presse , la TSR, ouvrent des brèches , par des textes, des interview choisis , mettant en doute l'initiative UDC. Ces personnes qui n'acceptent pas de voir les problèmes posés par une surpopulation nuisante pour le bien être des familles, des loyers supportables, des paysages naturels et entretenus, de la nourriture de l'eau potable de proximité. Une meilleure répartition des entreprises et des populations dans le monde devrait primer sur la concentration dans un ou quelques Pays. Que font toutes ces organisations internationales, plus propices aux armes qu'à des solutions de paix , de bien-être dans notre planète terre.

M
Marcos DesMeules
The following contribution has been automatically translated from ES.

It is very clear to me that Switzerland is open to everyone, as we are a country that defines itself as multicultural. We have been brought up with this philosophy for generations. We respect other cultures and everyone who comes from another country, regardless of continent, skin colour or religion. ____Labour has always been needed and we have recognised this. The initiative is not denying this. Rather, it is a wake-up call to our authorities to be more selective regarding residence and work permits, avoiding letting just anyone in, as they have done recently, including, to a large extent, the criminals who are now invading our streets. __Perhaps they authorised and granted permits en masse due to pressure from the European government, because of signed treaties and agreements... Perhaps for other reasons, but it is we, the citizens, who are left to pick up the pieces of those policies. And as citizens, we’re starting to get fed up. It doesn’t mean that to please other countries we have to inherit and suffer their same problems, problems we didn’t have.____The initiative is aimed at curbing all those who neither contribute nor pay their dues. And when I say ‘contribute’, I mean knowledge, manual labour... In short, all those activities or skills that could enrich us and help us grow as a country. ____We are not closed off, nor will we be; it’s just that now, to prevent further damage to our economy and society, we must be more selective. __The number of people is the least of it, for Switzerland, if we look at it historically, was founded with a very small population, and we have reached the top thanks to the quality of its inhabitants, not the quantity. __Our country deserves the best, because to everyone who arrives, we have always offered and shared precisely that... The best!

Me queda muy claro que Suiza está abierta a todos, pues somos un país que se define como multicultural. Con esa filosofía nos han educado durante generaciones. Somos respetuosos de las culturas y de todo aquel que viene de otro país, no importando continente, color o religión. ____La mano de obra siempre ha sido necesaria y se la hemos reconocido. La iniciativa no la esta negando. Es mas bien un llamado de atención a nuestras autoridades para que sean mas selectivos cuestión permisos de residencia y de trabajo, evitando dejar pasar a cualquiera, como lo han hecho últimamente, incluyendo en gran parte a esa delincuencia que ahora invade nuestras calles . __Quizás autorizaron y dieron permisos en masa por presiones del gobierno europeo, por los tratados firmados, acuerdos...Quizás por otras razones, pero quien esta pagando los platos rotos de esas políticas somos los ciudadanos. Y como ciudadanos, ya empezamos a estar hartos. No quiere decir que para contentar a los demás países tengamos que heredar y padecer sus mismos problemas, problemas que no teníamos.____La iniciativa va destinada a frenar a todos aquellos que no aportan ni cotizan. Y cuando digo aportar me refiero a conocimientos, trabajos manuales...En fin, todas aquellas actividades o conocimientos que nos pudieran enriquecer y hacer crecer como país. ____No estamos cerrados ni lo vamos a estar, solo que ahora, para no deteriorar mas nuestra economía y sociedad, debemos ser mas selectivos. __El número de personas es lo de menos, pues Suiza, , si lo comparamos históricamente se creo muy poca población, y hemos llegado a la cima, gracias a la calidad de sus habitantes , no a la cantidad. __Nuestro país se merece lo mejor, porque a toda persona que llega , siempre la hemos ofrecido y les hemos compartido, justamente eso... Lo mejor!

I
Interlaker77
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

One of the secrets of Switzerland’s success lies in the fact that it has largely isolated itself from Europe and other countries on various issues. Opening the borders to uncontrolled immigration has been, and remains, a clear failure in Europe. I simply cannot understand how anyone can describe the result of this referendum as ‘close’. Are the Swiss losing their minds?

Eines der Erfolgsgeheimnisse der Schweiz liegt darin, dass sie sich in verschiedenen Fragen weitgehend von Europa und anderen Ländern isoliert hat. Die Öffnung der Grenzen für unkontrollierte Zuwanderung war und ist in Europa eindeutig ein Fehlschlag. Ich verstehe überhaupt nicht, wie man bei dieser Volksabstimmung von einem „knappen“ Ergebnis sprechen kann. Verlieren die Schweizer den Verstand

J
jepyerly@websud.ch
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.

Our roads and public transport are overburdened, as are our hospitals and schools. Urban sprawl continues to destroy our land, our landscapes and our biodiversity. Water and energy shortages arise at the slightest lack of rain. The business community, the PLR and the Centre are opposed to this initiative for short-term financial gain. The Left and the Greens, who know nothing of the natural laws of life, are against it because it is the UDC that is putting its finger on the real problems. Let us also consider crime, and those families leaving their homelands in Africa or elsewhere – these uprooted people – because of a sick global economy.

Nos routes, nos transports publics sont surchargés , comme nos hôpitaux, nos écoles. Le bétonnage n'en finit pas de détruire notre terre nourricière, nos paysages , la biodiversité. L'eau , l'énergie sont en manque dès la plus petite période sans pluie. Les milieux économiques ,PLR, Centre , sont contre cette initiative par intérêt financier à court terme. La gauche et les Verts , qui ne connaissent rien aux lois naturelles de la vie , sont contre , parce que c'est l'UDC qui met le doigt sur les vrais problèmes . Pensons aussi à la criminalité , à ces familles qui quittent leurs Patries d'Afrique ou d'ailleurs , ces personnes déracinées, à cause d'une économie mondiale malade .

F
federico.cardelli@libero.it
The following contribution has been automatically translated from IT.

As an immigrant myself, I believe it is necessary to curb immigration — regardless of who is promoting the initiative (I am wary of all political parties, including the SVP).__1. Selection. Canada, Australia, Japan and the USA select the immigrants they need. Switzerland used to do the same until twenty years ago: why not now?__2. Wage dumping. Immigrants and cross-border workers willingly accept conditions worse than the norm, driving down wages and rights for everyone. In fact, even Marx was against mass immigration. It is no coincidence that the ‘No’ campaign is mainly funded by Economiesuisse.__3. Low birth rate. Solving this through immigration is called ‘ethnic replacement’. Instead, families must be allowed to have more children — and the first thing to tackle is wage dumping.__4. Integration. A few immigrants at a time integrate; large numbers (understandably) tend to stick with their compatriots and thus “self-ghettoise”.__I am here because I share the mindset and political system, whereas Italy made me feel sick. Too many, however, come out of opportunism, retaining incompatible mindsets – in Italy, almost everyone thinks that “Switzerland is rich because it steals”.

Da immigrato, ritengo necessario rallentare l'immigrazione — a prescindere da chi promuove l'iniziativa (diffido di ogni partito, UDC inclusa).__1. Selezione. Canada, Australia, Giappone e USA selezionano gli immigrati di cui hanno bisogno. Fino a vent'anni fa lo faceva anche la Svizzera: perché ora non più?__2. Dumping salariale. Immigrati e frontalieri accettano volentieri condizioni peggiori della norma, abbassando salari e diritti per tutti. Infatti, pure Marx era contro l'immigrazione di massa. Non a caso la campagna per il "No" è finanziata principalmente da Economiesuisse.__3. Bassa natalità. Risolverla con l'immigrazione si chiama “sostituzione etnica”. Si deve invece permettere alle famiglie di fare più figli — e la prima cosa da combattere è il dumping salariale.__4. Integrazione. Pochi immigrati per volta si integrano; grandi quantità (comprensibilmente) tendono a stare fra connazionali e quindi “auto-ghettizzarsi”.__Io sono qui perché condivido mentalità e sistema politico, mentre dell'Italia avevo la nausea. Troppi invece vengono per opportunismo, mantenendo mentalità incompatibili – in Italia un po’ tutti pensano che "la Svizzera è ricca perché ruba".

A
Anych

Absolutely! Apparently Switzerland is crowded, to find accommodation mission impossible, rents are inherited literally.____I lived near international aiport there were flights with refugges regularily turned back by Swiss customs.____Switzerland is full unfortunately.

S
Smiss

Switzerland has added 2 million the past 15-20 years and it shows. ____Housing. Difficult back then, is in even a bigger crises now. In a country where only a bit over 30% of the population own their own homes. Open green spaces are torn down, skyscrapers go up. So much for being green. Been years since I've seen the once populaous hedgehog let alone the occasional ferret. And the onky solution to housing? More skyscrapers. Will adding another 2 million help this issue? ____Ever increasing crime. We don't need to blame immigrants to do some basic math. If 5% of the population commits criminal acts, adding another 2 million will add 100'000 criminals into the system. Of course we will need more police. More policing powers. Police become fearful and aggressive. Do we really want a cop with a machine gun on every corner? Swiss prisons are already at 97-100% capacity. Will we need to pay to build more prisons, have more guards, etc? Or will they just start letting various criminals out early to fit the new ones in?____Overrun schools ....swiss schools are starting to fail and cannot keep up with the current influx. Lausanne schools have been rated poorest in the nation. Should this not be remedied before adding another 2 million? Perhaps Start getting classrooms disciplined and in a condition to teach beforehand?____Hospitals overrun...add 2 million more you might get a few medical workers...but seems not enough to cover for the additional 2 million. If adding 2 million really worked in such a manner we wouldnt be having issues now after 2 decades of unchecked growth, would we? ____Roads...just had the pleasure of seeing an ambulance and fire truck stuck in traffic. While adding 2 million, this main route has remained a single lane. Worse, they made it smaller by cutting part of it off for a bike lane (which now also encroach on pedestrian sidewalks). Add another 2 million and it will probably be quicker to walk to hospital taking steps between chest pains. ____Public transport...almost need to have a controller to push people in as they do in Japan. Or perhaps we can start hanging off the trains as they do in India? Don't even bother trying to get on a bus or metro unless it's something like 2200 on a Tuesday. ____I was walking through a wooded area next to an popular lake spot. The city in its infinite wisdom has not increased toilets. As you might imagine, the woods were strewn with used toilet paper and unburried feces. I understand people need to use the toilet on occasion. Especially after partying all day at the lake. Im all for partying. I'm all for pooping. But without the proper infrastructure it becomes an unsightly health hazard for everyone. The problem will not go away until the city gets the infrastructure under control and puts in toilets. When proper facilities are installed then those not using them need to be sanctioned. The problem gets solved. Adding another 20'000 people on the beach with no prior planning will not solve the issue, it will make it worse. And it doesn't matter if those 20'000 extra come from Zurich, Ukraine, or Uganda...the problem will still exist and get worse without proper planning of the authorities...who have seemingly so far failed in doing so on many fronts.____We have hard drug dealers hitting everyone up in front of the courthouse/metro/gare, knife fights in the park, brawls in the streets, riots in the cities, child prostitution in geneva, stabbings in Zurich. Perhaps Switzerland needs to catch up with the last 2 million before adding 2 million more

J
jepyerly@websud.ch
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.

Unfortunately, we cannot simply move our borders. We must strike a balance between available space and infrastructure for transport, food, drinking water and services, healthcare facilities, education, energy supply and so on. The price of building land is skyrocketing, and there is a shortage of housing. Better cooperation with neighbouring countries, to establish businesses there with local staff, as well as the numerous and costly international organisations, should keep a closer watch on corruption and the way certain countries in Africa and elsewhere are governed, in order to prevent these countries from becoming depopulated and Europe from becoming overpopulated.

Malheureusement, nous ne pouvons pas déplacer nos frontières. Nous devons respecter un équilibre : places disponible, infrastructures de transport, de nourriture, d'eau potable et de service, de lieux de santé, de formation , d'apport d'énergie etc. Les prix des terrains à bâtir flambent, le logements manquent . Une meilleure collaboration avec les pays environnant, pour y installer des entreprises, avec le personnel de proximité, également les organisations internationales, tellement nombreuses et coûteuses devraient mieux surveiller la corruption et l'art de diriger certains Pays d'Afrique et d'ailleurs , afin d'éviter que ces Pays se dépeuples et surpeuple l'Europe.

M
mako
The following contribution has been automatically translated from JA.

The idea that Switzerland is making immigrants take on low-paid, unskilled labour made me realise how times have changed. Wasn’t it the case that, in principle, Switzerland paid wages at a level that allowed workers to maintain a certain standard of living, regardless of the type of work? I had always assumed that this was what enabled the vast majority of people living in Switzerland to receive a high-quality education and maintain the so-called ‘rational Swiss citizen’. If it is truly the case that Switzerland has established a category of low-paid, unskilled labour and is assigning it to immigrants, I believe that category must be abolished without delay. Instead, as was the case in Switzerland previously, a minimum wage must be guaranteed to all Swiss citizens—one that ensures a level of purchasing power sufficient to foster and sustain ‘rational Swiss citizens’, regardless of the type of work. We must not commit the folly of adopting a system akin to Japan’s ‘technical intern’ scheme.

スイスが移民に低賃金単純労働を担わせているとは、時代が変わったなと思いました。スイスは原則的に労働の種類にかかわらず、労働者が一定の購買力を保つことができる水準の賃金を支払っていたのではありませんか？それによって、大多数のスイスに住む人々が、良質な教育を受け、いわゆる、「理性的なスイス国民」を維持してきたのだとばかり思っていました。もし本当に、スイスが低賃金単純労働というカテゴリーを設けて、それを移民に担わせているのだとしたら、一刻も早くそのカテゴリーを廃止して、以前のスイスのように、労働の種類を問わず、「理性的なスイス国民」を誕生させて維持できる程度の購買力を担保する賃金を最低賃金として、全てのスイス国民に保障する必要があると考えます。日本の「技能実習生」制度のような暗愚を犯してはなりません。

S
sbbcffffs
@mako

Exactly my thoughts, very well said.

L
Leo_1970
The following contribution has been automatically translated from FR.

Sovereignty, Schengen and direct democracy __I am deliberately stepping back from the emotional debate surrounding the attack in Winterthur. Not because security isn’t important, but because I believe the real crux of the debate lies elsewhere.__For several days now, I have mainly been hearing the same argument against this initiative: ‘Beware of the Schengen agreements’, ‘Beware of the European Union’, ‘Beware of the diplomatic consequences’. Very well. So let’s talk about it seriously.__I am going to use a deliberately provocative word: interference. Not in the sense of some conspiracy theory, but in the sense of external political pressure that is increasingly weighing on Switzerland’s democratic choices. For the real question boils down to this: to what extent does the Swiss people remain sovereign if certain democratic decisions become practically impossible to implement without risking political or economic sanctions from supranational bodies? __Switzerland is supposed to be a direct democracy. The people vote, the people decide, the people take responsibility. Yet for years, whenever a people votes the ‘wrong way’, they are then told why their vote is unrealistic, dangerous or morally suspect. __The 2005 French referendum on the European Constitution remains a powerful symbol of this democratic divide. People say no, and technocrats then reorganise the treaties differently. Even today, many European citizens feel that the European Union has become a technocratic machine detached from reality. Yes, there is an elected European Parliament, but much of the power remains within complex structures that are difficult for the average citizen to understand. __And as soon as people speak of sovereignty, borders, wage pressure or demographics, they are often met with fear-mongering, moralising or simplistic accusations. Yet a large proportion of citizens are simply asking a legitimate question: does a small country still have the right to democratically control its future, its demographic trajectory and its social model without being subjected to constant external pressure? __That is the real debate

Souveraineté, Schengen et démocratie directe __Je vais volontairement sortir du débat émotionnel autour de l’attaque de Winterthour. Non pas parce que la sécurité n’est pas importante, mais parce que le vrai nœud du débat me semble ailleurs.__Depuis plusieurs jours, j’entends surtout le même argument contre cette initiative : « Attention aux accords de Schengen », « Attention à l’Union européenne », « Attention aux conséquences diplomatiques ». Très bien. Alors parlons-en sérieusement.__Je vais utiliser un mot volontairement provocateur : ingérence. Pas dans un délire complotiste, mais dans le sens d’une pression politique extérieure qui pèse de plus en plus sur les choix démocratiques suisses. Car la vraie question devient simple : jusqu’où le peuple suisse reste-t-il souverain si certaines décisions démocratiques deviennent pratiquement impossibles à appliquer sans risquer des sanctions politiques ou économiques venant de structures supranationales ? __La Suisse est censée être une démocratie directe. Le peuple vote, le peuple décide, le peuple assume. Or, depuis des années, lorsqu’un peuple vote dans le « mauvais sens », on lui explique ensuite pourquoi son vote serait irréaliste, dangereux ou moralement suspect. __Le référendum français de 2005 sur la Constitution européenne reste un symbole énorme de cette fracture démocratique. Des peuples disent non, et des technocrates réorganisent ensuite les traités autrement. Aujourd’hui encore, beaucoup de citoyens européens ont le sentiment que l’Union européenne est devenue une machine technocratique éloignée des réalités. Oui, il existe un Parlement européen élu, mais une grande partie du pouvoir reste dans des structures complexes et peu lisibles pour le citoyen moyen. __Et dès qu’un peuple parle de souveraineté, de frontières, de pression salariale ou de démographie, on lui répond souvent par la peur, la morale ou des accusations simplistes. Alors qu’une grande partie des citoyens posent simplement une question légitime : un petit pays a-t-il encore le droit de maîtriser démocratiquement son avenir, son rythme démographique et son modèle social sans subir une pression extérieure permanente ? __Voilà le vrai débat

K
KanisSapphirus

Switzerland’s infrastructure and housing pressures are real. But attributing them primarily to modest population growth, especially relative to other similar nations (e.g., Austria, Sweden) oversimplifies a more complex issue. ____A country should not simultaneously:____ • resist major infrastructure expansion;__ • restrict housing development;__ • maintain low taxes;__ • rely heavily on foreign labor in healthcare, construction, research, finance, etc.;____and then act surprised when growth creates bottlenecks.____Switzerland’s prosperity was not built in isolation. It emerged through international trade, finance, multinational firms, research institutions, and foreign labor — including many groups that earlier generations also feared or resented. I’ve not heard anyone complaining about the foreign billionaires buying up properties they rarely use or the tax windfalls from immigrants like the Glencore billionaires… ____If the concern is quality of life, then serious discussion should focus on housing policy, transport investment, labor-market strategy, and long-term demographic planning. ____Slogans implying that 9 million people is sustainable but 10 million represents civilizational collapse are disingenuous at best.____Specifically on the road infrastructure: maybe vote to raise the absurdly-low 40chf vignette fee? If you expect materially different outcomes while refusing to change the inputs to a process ... well, that's generally not how the world works.____As for congestion: if driving education taught that it's unacceptable to drive or overtake in the left lane when you are moving more than 20 km/h *below* the posted speed limit, that would go a long way towards easing congestion, especially on the A1. ;-)

J
Jorg Hiker

Imagine you are the boss of an American company. Would you invest in a country where you cannot work personally, where you are not easily allowed to relocate American managers or find trained staff, and which is openly hostile toward foreigners? Of course not. You would move your company elsewhere. Once that decision is made, it is incredibly difficult to turn back. Now, imagine you are a wealthy American or Asian man. Would you move your capital to a country where you aren't allowed to live? Unlikely.

D
DarioPad

I would not support this referendum in its current form. I understand why people are tempted by it; Switzerland feels more crowded, expensive, and stretched. But the proposed cap is too blunt, too legally risky, and too disconnected from the actual mechanisms causing pressure.____A better Swiss answer would be: controlled growth, not fantasy no-growth; capacity-based immigration, not unlimited demand-driven immigration; and serious infrastructure/housing reform, not just a constitutional number. The country does not need panic. It needs a dashboard, hard thresholds, and political courage to build where growth is happening.

H
heaven

Whether the Swiss population should be capped is a matter of intense public debate, with the electorate split almost evenly. The issue is the subject of a national referendum on June 14, 2026, on the "Sustainability Initiative," which would legally restrict the permanent resident population to 10 million before 2050.

W
wbrauen@cavalcasa.ch
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

It’s unbelievable what lies and falsehoods are being spread! There is simply no plausible argument against this initiative. 1. If the initiative were adopted, nothing would happen at first! 2. If those in charge kept their current promises, there wouldn’t be 10 million people in Switzerland! 3. At best, in 2050 the citizens of the time could vote to overturn the cap, which they probably wouldn’t do, because by then things will be even tighter than they are today. If it’s rejected, we’ll be swamped by even more immigration! Is that what we want?

Es ist unglaublich was für Lügen und Unwahrheiten erzählt werden! Es gibt schlichtweg kein plausibles Argument gegen diese Initiative. 1. Nach Annahme der Initiative würde vorerst Garnichts passieren! 2. Wenn die Verantwortlichen ihre jetzigen Versprechen halten würden, gibt es keine 10Mio Schweiz! 3. Allenfalls könnten 2050 die damaligen Bürgerinnen und Bürger in einer Abstimmung die Deckelung kippen, was sie wahrscheinlich nicht machen würden, weil bis da alles noch viel enger sein wird als heute. Bei Ablehnung werden wir von noch mehr Zuwanderung überschwemmt! Wollen wir das

J
Jorg Hiker
@wbrauen@cavalcasa.ch

Please, consider what foreign companies would do. They will move their investments and capital elsewhere, rather than waiting around for Swiss to potentially change their minds. This initiative is potentially a fatal blow to the very heart of Swiss wealth.

Anonymous
Anonymous
The following contribution has been automatically translated from DE.

Why not simply introduce very high, sector-specific minimum wages for immigrants instead of points-based systems and red tape – and apply this to everyone? This would reduce the red tape involved in labour migration from third countries. And it would likely lead to less wage pressure and less unchecked growth. Companies would be encouraged to recruit domestically first or actively retrain local workers – retraining could be supported by tax breaks. In this way, we would fill jobs with people who already live here, reduce unemployment and ease the strain on infrastructure. And this can, if necessary, be renegotiated with the EU at a later date.

Wieso nicht einfach sehr hohe, branchenspezifische Mindestgehälter für Zuwanderer anstelle von Punktesystemen und Bürokratie – und zwar für alle? Somit gäbe es einen Bürokratie-Abbau bei der Drittstaaten-Arbeitsmigration. Und wohl weniger Lohndruck und weniger massloses Wachstum. Unternehmen würden dazu motiviert, zuerst im Inland zu rekrutieren oder Inländer aktiv umzuschulen – Umschulungen könnten durch Steuererleichterungen unterstützt werden. So besetzen wir Stellen mit Menschen, die schon hier leben, senken die Arbeitslosigkeit und entlasten die Infrastruktur. Und dies kann, wenn nötig, später mit der EU nachverhandelt werden.

SWI swissinfo.ch - a branch of Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG SSR

SWI swissinfo.ch - a branch of Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG SSR