Switzerland as a country usually strikes good balance between various extremes, much better than US or EU countries do. I have no doubt they will work it out, not ideally, but better than most. Immigration they tackled much better than rest of Europe for example.
And for the vote - its 1:1 Brexit. Vote for capping, damage your long term prosperity, and those unpopular jobs still will need to be staffed, or country will work worse, be dirtier etc. And if one can earn cleaning streets or putting stuff in shop shelves as much as cca doctor in France (with higher costs of life, but it doesn't have to be extreme), the amount of people willing to try coming and working is basically endless.
The idea one can freeze time and keep the country as some idealized image from their childhood (without the nasty stuff that happened ie in 70s to orphaned kids en masse, aka Verdingkinder), one would have to become second North Korea. Everything changes these days, massively and quickly. Dictators won't be sending their kids to study here under false names anymore, would they.
Japan heavily utilizes foreign workers via a Gulf style guestworker program, and even that has led to the far-right Sanseito becoming Japan's highest rated opposition party and the far-right wing of the LDP winning internal party politics.
They get to keep their passports and can return any time, calling it Gulf-style is a bit much. There are abuses - so are there in Europe - but it's not like they sacrificed a thousand or so immigrant worker lives on the Tokyo Olympics in Qatar 2022 style.
Though I don't think this is fully true of Japan -- it's one of the easiest countries to naturalize in if you give up your other citizenships but does have the quality of always being seen as a foreigner. It's just that few people naturalize as Japanese because their immigration is most open to people from developed countries who aren't interested in giving up their birth passport to acquire Japanese nationality. If you just want a Japanese passport though no matter the downsides, I think it's one of the easier citizenship to get for an American to obtain.
> it's one of the easiest countries to naturalize
It's also one of the worst developed nation economies and has a massive old, shrinking population problem and is well associated with people having no kids, having no prospects for a better life, and having huge amounts of its population live alone shuttered from the outside world.
A good economy has many benefits and skilled immigration can significantly improve developed nation economies.
I’ve just described some famously “excellent economy” countries, but I certainly didn’t describe Japan.
It's a place with no economic growth prospects, where you have to work far longer than people in other developed nations, and where your chance of companionship and having your own family is the lowest it can possibly be in the world.
But at least it's clean
> extremely high suicide rates
Sort by "All" and you will see Japan is #30, far below many other highly developed nations.
They're also very unhappy on average: https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20250410/p2a/00m/0na/01...
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20250410/p2a/00m/0na/01...
> Among Japanese respondents who said they were not happy, the most common reason was their "economic situation," cited by 64%
> Only 15% of Japanese respondents said "overall quality of life will be much better in five years," the lowest among all nations surveyed. In contrast, the highest optimism for the future was seen in Colombia at 79%, followed by India at 78% and 76% each in Argentina, Indonesia and Mexico.
> Only 13% of Japanese pollees answered that their current quality of life is "good" -- the lowest among all 30 countries. This was less than half the average of 42% and notably lower than Hungary (22%), the second lowest, and South Korea (24%), the third lowest.
> Besides, Japan is a good real world example that you do not need to lean on immigrant labor to stop your country from becoming "dirty"
I struggle to see this. Central Geneva is full of beautiful, well-maintained green spaces and children's play areas with plenty of larger parks scattered around.
Good thing no one asked you. Why should you have a say in how someone else uses their land if all they are doing is building more housing units?
I know that sounds weird, but bear with me.
Compare the no build scenario to the scenario where you build one more apartment, but that one new apartment is smaller than you want.
In the no build scenario, the person who wants to move to Geneva doesn't get to, or they have to rent a room in an existing apartment.
In the scenario where you build that one additional apartment, a person moves into it instead. So they make a choice that that was better than their existing situation.
That choice is someone increasing their comfort level. There are lots of housing situations that are worse than a new apartment, even a very small one.
The mistake is not realizing that everyone who moves into a new unit is increasing their comfort.