Is Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle Using Taxpayer Money to Mislead?

In Finland, there is a taxpayer-funded media company – Yleisradio often shortened as Yle – whose purpose is to produce truthful reporting. Unfortunately, the company does not always seem to grasp this fact; instead, its programming often clearly reflects the journalists’ own – green-leftist – political views.

At worst, this manifests itself in perspectives favoring the political left and even in what appears to be the deliberate misleading of the audience. A good example of this was provided by Yle’s recent article titled “Report: Finland has succeeded well in integrating immigrants, only Sweden ahead.”

In reality, according to the article itself, the report in question did not actually address immigrant integration, but rather focused mainly on financial and other support directed at them, as well as, for example, opportunities for newcomers to participate in society. In other words, Finland has not necessarily succeeded in integrating immigrants; instead, it has provided the second most services. This assessment did not include any evaluation of the actual outcome – that is, the success of integration.

Therefore – my dear readers – each of you may consider for yourselves whether the generous funding of Yleisradio with Finnish taxpayers’ money is truly justified. Or is it rather a case of misuse of people’s money?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
An Economist’s Fact-Based Response to Polarizing Tax Claims
Acts of Vandalism Against a Political Party
Orwellian Big Brother monitors journalists of Finland's Public Broadcasting Company Yle

Finland to Cut Off Taxpayer Money for Immigration

Under the leadership of Finland’s Minister of Finance, Riikka Purra (Finns Party), a budget proposal has been drawn up which would allocate no state-collected tax money next year to the integration of immigrants or the reception of quota refugees. This would be a major change from the current situation, in which a significant share of tax revenue is used precisely for these purposes.

According to Minister Purra, “The integration structures within the public sector, and the ‘private’ integration industry that has grown around them, form one branch of the welfare state that has become enormous. The taxpayer foots the bill. If immigration broadly worked, such structures wouldn’t be needed at all. The government has previously cut integration spending, and in my opinion, it could easily cut more.”

Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party) commented on the proposed change, stating that “Integration should not be measured by the amount of money spent, and society should have an incentive to push those granted permission straight into work. That would also put an end to all sorts of busywork back home, such as collecting droppings in matchboxes.”

It remains to be seen, however, how the other government parties and Parliament will respond to the Finance Minister’s proposal. It is expected that the ending of support for companies making their living from immigration would face opposition within the government, at least from the Swedish People’s Party, and in Parliament from the entire green-left bloc.

The taxpayer, on the other hand, would welcome it—since once Finland’s chronically deficit-ridden state budget is brought into balance, they might one day have a say over the use of a larger share of their own paycheck.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A New Beginning: Economic Independence in the Hands of Developing Nations
Finnish Branch of Extinction Rebellion Faces Possible Ban
Finland's Stance on NATO Defense Spending Is Linked to the Geopolitical Threat from Russia

Immigration Policy Should Be Based on Evidence

Finland is one of those countries where the native population has, on average, just slightly more than one child per family. As a result, the number of ethnically Finnish people is set to decline rapidly over the coming decades.

This poses a problem for the demographic structure of society, as the number of working-age people decreases while the number of elderly individuals in need of care increases. This fact is often cited as a key reason for the need for immigration to Finland—a position supported by both the liberal right and the green-left political spectrum.

Only the national-conservative Finns Party has clearly disagreed, advocating for stricter controls on humanitarian immigration, particularly from developing countries, as well as on forms of labor-based immigration where wages are insufficient to support the newcomers, leaving taxpayers to cover part of the costs.

This discussion has been further influenced by the immigration minister of Sweden, a country that has pursued even more open immigration policies than Finland. According to the minister, "there is a dramatic difference between receiving 100,000 asylum seekers and 100,000 highly educated labor migrants."

This fact has often been overlooked by Finnish proponents of immigration. For this reason, I hope they will carefully examine Sweden’s experiences with its immigration policies, listen to the relevant Swedish government minister, and draw the correct conclusions from all of this. 

The fact is that even in immigration policy, Finland does not need polarization but rather an acknowledgment of the facts. And after that, decision-making based on evidence.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
10% of Foreign Students in Finland Failed to Meet Residence Requirements
Finland’s Minister of Finance Believes Not All Cultures Are Equally Good
Immigration Policy Must Take Artificial Intelligence and Robots into Account

Finland to Tighten Asylum Legislation and Reduce Undocumented Residents

Finland is modifying its asylum legislation. One of the new changes will be the restriction of the right to appeal a negative decision.

This change is necessary because, until now, it has been possible in Finland to remain without asylum rights by making new asylum applications. Thus, people from safe conditions who have come to the country for social security reasons have been able to stay in the country for years.

The new legislative amendment will take into account the means provided by the new European Reception Directive, thereby reducing the number of undocumented residents. At the same time, the amount of reception money offered to them will be reduced to a minimum, so Finland's attractiveness is expected to decrease significantly among people from developing countries seeking to enter Western countries on false grounds.

This way, dishonest asylum applications can be reduced, thereby speeding up the processing times of applications from those genuinely in need of personal protection. It will also reduce the costs of asylum seeking for Finnish taxpayers.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Getting asylum in Finland becomes significantly more difficult
The Finnish forest is life-threatening to asylum-seekers
A new wave of asylum seekers

Orwellian Big Brother monitors journalists of Finland's Public Broadcasting Company Yle

The Finnish tabloid Ilta-Sanomat heard from a long-time journalist of the Finnish Public Broadcasting Company Yle that it is problematic for them that his articles feature "too many heterosexual men". When asked about this, the Ilta-Sanomat journalist discovered that our publicly funded media records not only the gender, age, skin color, and social status of interviewees but also what kinds of thoughts or bodies they have.

Subsequently, Yle's editor-in-chief Jouko Jokinen tries his best in the Ilta-Sanomat article to explain away the image of the company’s operations that the interviewer—and ultimately the reader—might have formed. The article also reveals that Yle systematically collects statistics on the content of journalists' articles.

These are "basic things that can be automatically identified by text analysis and whose tracking is ethical. What topics we cover, how they are geographically distributed, who are the most interviewed individuals, what gender they represent, what the most used titles are, which political parties are most frequently mentioned, and so on."

And finally, the development manager of Yle then—perhaps unwittingly—reveals that "we are trying to diversify our content. Nowadays, we discuss a lot in our editorial offices, for example, whether it is always privileged people who speak for us. There are many underrepresented groups that do not have a voice in society."

In other words, confirming that our tax-funded media operates like an Orwellian big brother, whose duties include collecting data based on which even long-time Yle journalists can be presented with "ratings on the table" if they have interviewed people from so-called underrepresented groups too infrequently.

After reading the article, I was left wondering if such an Orwellian big brother is really the kind of service that Finnish taxpayers want to fund. Or perhaps they would prefer that the money be used for something entirely different—either within Yle or in other sectors of society.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish journalist called for British Prime Minister´s head to be placed on London bridge to dry
Racism or self-preservation instinct?
Nightwish and the Disney Company

Why doesn't immigration cause protests in Japan?

Nathan Cofnas published a message on social media where he wondered why increased immigration in Japan does not cause similar resistance as in Western countries. His conclusion was that "ethnonationalism isn't very popular."

He had added a figure to the title of a story in Foreign Policy Magazine, saying that "Japan Radically Increased Immigration - and No One Protested." Half of the answer to Nathan's question is provided by the story, describing that immigrants in Japan have to work in the country and are not supported by the social welfare system - read "taxpayer's money" - as in Europe.

The other half of the explanation can be seen in the statistics shown on Wikipedia. At the end of June 2022, there were 2,760,635 foreigners residing in Japan. The most important ethnicities were Chinese, Vietnamese, South Koreans, Filipinos, Nepalese, Indonesians, Americans, Thais, and Taiwanese.

This list is completely different from the ethnicities of immigrants in Europe, especially those raising negative attitudes among ethnically Europeans by committing rapes, terrorism, and other illegal activities. Therefore, it is not difficult to understand why immigration is considerably more popular among Japanese than Europeans. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
100 percent of the violence is related to migration
A Finnish police officer is afraid to speak about the problems of immigration
Sweden already in trouble - Finland following

Share of EU recovery funds will turn attitudes more negative

Finland´s share from the EU recovery (from COVID-19) funds is reduced by 300 million euros. Therefore, our share of funding is 4,2 billion euros less than our payment on the package. 

The reason for our reduced share is the economic recovery of Finland that being more positive than predicted. The basis for this conclusion is the development of the national GDP, which in 2021 increased by 3.5 percent from year 2020. 

Therefore one - e.g. the Prime Minister of our country - might think that the reduction in Finnish share is a fair decision. Unfortunately I must point out three facts. 

First, the economic growth of Finland was made by increasing its indebtedness considerably - by decisions made by a government led by the above mentioned prime minister. Second, the economic growth of Finland is predicted to slow down during the ongoing year. Third, the future of the Finnish forest industry - responsible of ca. 20 percent of the export value - has been challenged by the commission despite its high sustainability compared to other EU countries.

It should also be noted that the taxation burden on Finnish taxpayers is among the highest in EU, and increasing quickly. Therefore I would not be amazed if the attitudes among ordinary people in Finland would turn more negative towards EU in the becoming years. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A Finnish Professor would raise inheritance tax up to 65 percent
A new justification is needed for environmental activists
Will an attitude lead Ukraine into EU?

A Finnish Professor would raise inheritance tax up to 65 percent

Professor Heikki Hiilamo of the Helsinki University proposed that inheritance tax should be raised up to 65 percent. He justified that by the inequality of people, which reduces the chances of poor people to succeed in the society. He also noted that it takes a lot of education to allow them a chance to prosper, which is expensive and not possible in a highly unequal society. 

I just wonder how would such a high taxation of inheritance affect the motivation of elder people to work - and pay taxes - when their offspring would inherit only a third of their fortune and property? And how would that affect the accumulation of funds for investments in private companies owned by single families? 

And ultimately, how would such a high taxation finally affect the living standard of poor people in a free world, where rich ones always have a chance to find a new home in a country, where the taxation is reasonable and hard working is encouraged by a possibility of transferring its outcome to offspring?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
International Master´s degree is an opportunity to be used
A nurse´s question: who deserves health care, and who does not
Misuse of taxpayers´ money in Finland

International Master´s degree is an opportunity to be used

A total of  5 649 students from 142 countries applied for the international master´s programs of the Helsinki University. One fifth of them was accepted. 

This mass of young talented people could be a treasure. If their best portion would be hired by Finnish companies - once they have finished their master´s degrees - to strengthen their international readiness or to increase creative thinking in any aspect, it could add considerably to the success of Finnish economy. 

Unfortunately, it happens all too often that international students use Finnish universities only to gain a degree from a recognized western university, and continue to build a professional career elsewhere, especially in North America. Therefore I do encourage Finnish companies to familiarize themselves with the international programs of the universities, and to look for the best talents for recruitment on topics, where international background would be beneficial. 

The fact is, that in taxpayer´s view - who pay for most of the costs of universities - the only justification of educating foreign students is the benefit for the whole society. And therefore universities and companies should be active in finding ways to make profits based on the international education in our country. Otherwise we are just useful idiots.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Misuse of taxpayers´ money in Finland

A nurse´s question: who deserves health care, and who does not

In Finland there has been a long debate about nurse salaries. Those were raised considerably in 2008, which contributed considerably to the slow recovery of Finland from the Great Recession that was seen globally in 2007-2009. 

Despite that, the Finnish nurses are again on strike for their salaries, which they consider as left behind from other fields in the public sector. The employer´s representative somehow agree on the problem, but has also pointed out that there is no taxpayer´s money available to cover exceptional increases. However, most of the ordinary citizens support higher wages for the nurses, probably because many nurses leave their profession and nurse salaries are in other Nordic countries higher compared to Finland.

The strikes may turn long lasting, as the public sector of Finland has been running quickly into debt because of the loose economics policy in Finland and EU during the last years as well as additional costs due to the COVID-19 pandemic and consequences of the ongoing Russian war in Ukraine.

Very interestingly indeed, I saw today something I could not have imagined. It was a short story by the MTV3-media, in which a former nurse put the cat on the table. She said loudly the main problem of public health care in the modern democracies by pointing out that "now either the government or the employer has to say who no longer deserves care".

This is The Question, because the problem arises from the development of medical research, which continuously develops solutions to new health problems - and often they are very expensive. That leads to ever increasing costs of health care, and sooner or later - perhaps right now in Finland - the costs exceed the taxpayers ability to pay. 

So, it will be interesting to follow what happens next. Will the nurse´s comment make its way to political discussion or will it be quietly passed. Also, will the nurse be demonized on her "inhuman opinion", or will it be admitted that she has a valid point. 

It is, however clear that deciding on who will be treated from her disease and who will not is a question which is almost impossible to touch by politicians. Whatever they say or decide will raise a loud voice against them. And as well known, keeping voters happy is a serious concern for anyone who depends on the number of supporting votes in a free democracy.  

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
American black population more vulnerable to the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2

Misuse of taxpayers´ money in Finland

I analyzed the visibility of Finnish political parties in the politically oriented programs of the Finnish National Broadcasting company Yleisradio (Yle), which is funded by taxpayers. The time line of my study started after the last general discussion of party leaders in January 28, 2021, and ended yesterday (March 3, 2021).

During this time period, the parties had their representatives in Yle´s political programs as follows. 

Social Democrats: 6 times
National Coalition Party: 5 times
Center Party: 3 times
Greens: 2 times
True Finns: 2 times
Left Alliance: 1 time
Other (minor) parties: 0 times

I also compared these numbers to the parties´ share of votes in the last elections of the National Parliament in 2019. And calculated the percentage of votes obtained by each party per the number of times the party obtained visibility in Yle programs. My hypothesis was that - as Yle is funded by taxpayers´ money - the visibility of each party should reflect their share of votes. 

Social Democrats had the highest visibility as their representative was invited to Yle for each of 2.95 percent of votes. The National Coalition Party needed 3.4 percent of votes to get their representative to Yle programs. The corresponding numbers for the Center Party and Greens were 4.6 and 5.75 percent, respectively. The Left Alliance had only one representative for their 8.2 percent share of votes.

Interestingly, the second popular party - and the most popular one in the opposition - had only one representative per 8.75 percent of votes. That suggests that this party is not among the favorites of the Yle staff. 

If we compare the figures given above between different parties it appears that the Social Democrats had a three time over-visibility compared to True Finns in relation to their share of votes, thus falsifying my hypothesis. It should also be noted that the timing of True Finns visibility was already in the early February, thus timely distant from the becoming municipal elections in April, and therefore minimizing the effect of the results of their results.

Based on above, it appears that the editorial staff of Yle has not understood their job as servants of all people living in Finland. Instead, they misuse taxpayers money to support political actors with similar ambitions as their own. This conclusion is supported also by the very similar distribution of visibility of political parties in a highly similar analysis I made in October 2019 (available only in Finnish).

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Minister Maria Ohisalo panicked
Twitter account of an remarkable politician was locked

The original thought in Finnish:
Puolueiden kannatus ei vastaa niiden näkyvyyttä Ylen A-studiossa

175 happy winners

It is in interests of all children in developing countries to move to Finland or other western countries. The same is, of course, also true for adults who, from the poverty of a low standard of living, would have access to the welfare guaranteed by the Finnish social security.

Yesterday, as a result of active efforts of our government's Minister of Internal Affairs, Maria Ohisalo (Greens), the government of Finland decided to bring to our country - with taxpayers money - a total of 175 children or their single mothers from Afghanistan, Syria or other countries but residing now in refugee camps in Greece. The useful idiot of the left wing government, the Finnish Center Party, was apparently persuaded to accept the decision by a promise that failed asylum seekers illegally staying in our country would get an ankle tag to keep track of their movements.

The government's decision was probably no surprise to anyone in Finland, except for the case of single mothers. That is because prior to yesterday´s decision, the government had only spoken of children.

Actually I would not have written about this topic if the decision on these Muslim single parents would not have been included. However, that raised in my mind the question about the truthfulness of their marital status.

That was because we know from a long time ago that the official single parent status of Somali women is so common in Finland, that they cannot in any way be real single parents. Instead, these "single parents" are second or third wives of their men - according to Islamic law.

Thus, in connection with this decision, we have to ask from the Minister of the Interior how Finland will ensure that women who are now claimed to be single parents - and to be brought to our country at the expense of the Taxpayer - will not later turn out to be second or third wives, through whom their husbands can later apply for family reunification? And in due course, to bring their first wife and her children to be further maintained by working Finns?

At the same time, of course, one must bear in mind the common suspicion that some of the "children" may actually not turn out to be real children, but late teenagers or even adult men who have been sent to their journey as anchors for the parents. That is, as persons who, once having been granted an asylum, are able to reunite their families in Finland, thus further increasing the cost burden for the Finnish taxpayer.

The original blog text in Finnish

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Are we going to allow ISIS women to ride on their children?
Minister Maria Ohisalo panicked
Reapplications for asylum are made to prolong seeker´s stay

The Center and the National Coalition Party are willing to donate our tax money to the EU

European Stability Mechamism ESM founded in summer 2012 is part of the EU strategy designed to safeguard financial stability in the euro area. It is based on an idea that financial support will be given to member countries experiencing or threatened by financing difficulties.

ESM brought back memories from the era, when Greece was in acute crisis and also Finnish taxpayers money was dispersed to Greeks with no sorrow. Recently we were told that the main parties of our government - the National Coalition Party and the Center Party - are willing to outsource the use of this money to the qualified majority of EU countries. In other words, to give away even our theoretical possibility to control the use of Finnish taxpayers money.

I wrote (in Finnish) about this topic already in year 2011, when ESM was only under planning. I noted then that such a decision would be against the constitutional law of Finland, as the constitutional Law committee of the parliament had announced. This should be taken seriously also by the current politicians in the National coalition party and the Center party.

In practice this means the leaders of these two parties, Petteri Orpo and Juha Sipilä, will need support from two thirds of the members of the parliament to get their view accepted. Therefore it is important that the citizens of Finland will be awake during the elections of the parliaments of Finland and the European Union next spring: a vote to an incorrect party would give an open mandate to EU for the use of our common wallet - including cases which are against our own will.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
World Resources Institute had an arrogant demand

The original thought in Finnish:
Keskusta ja Kokoomus lahjoittaisivat verorahamme EU:n käytettäväksi

Reapplications for asylum are made to prolong seeker´s stay

Two women who make their living from refugee-related business - Marjaana Laine and Pia Lindfors - claimed that the renewals of asylum applications in Finland are due to problems in the process. In order to fix the problem, they demanded more juridical help for the applicants - and thus more money for themselves.

This comment was responded by the immigration office leader Esko Repo, who said in a politically correct way, that the most common reason for renewals is not problems in the process. Instead, most of the reapplications are made because the applicant has a new  justification for his application. Half of these new arguments relate to leaving islam or turning to christianity.

In the same response, Repo told that "approximately half of the asylum claims in 2018 were reapplications. 16 % of decisions made were positive and 32% negative." In other words, two applications of three were unfounded as based on the decisions.

My interpretation on this is that most of the applications are made simply to prolong the time of staying in Finland on taxpayers money. This option is made extremely attractive by the fact that the number of reapplications has not been restricted.

In other words, the Finnish taxpayers have been put under an obligation to cover the costs of asylum seekers without any limit; and that attracts them to make more and more applications. The same taxpayer´s money is also shared by people in the refugee-related business such a Laine and Lindfors. No wonder that they try to keep that option open with all possible excuses. Even with invented ones, as demonstrated by their claim cited in the beginning of this text.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A set of immigration-derived sexual crimes in a Finnish town
The Danish government proposed reforms for immigration policy
Rape statistics in Finland and Sweden are breaking prejudices

The original thought in Finnish:
Turvapaikanhakijoiden uusintahakemukset tehdään maassaolon pitkittämiseksi