> Europe can (and does to some degree) solve this issue the same way we do here in Canada: high immigration rates.
This only works if it's difficult for migrants to get on welfare. Otherwise you attract migrants who just want to live off welfare, not work, which doesn't contribute to supporting the growing retired population. (Not that migrants should be blamed for this; if you could get a better life for yourself and your family just by moving to a country that paid you for not even having to work, of course it's a rational decision).
In most countries it's _impossible_ for immigrants to get on welfare, until they become fully naturalized. This is a myth that's put about by the right.
There is however a state obligation towards asylum seekers while their claim is pending, and a basic interest in not allowing huge camps of starving homeless people to develop.
In most EU countries one has access to social benefits from the permanent-resident stage (which typically takes 3-5 years to obtain). It is not necessary to be fully naturalized.
> Otherwise you attract migrants who just want to live off welfare, not work,
This is a common misconception. Those people on welfare work, it's just that it's mostly illegal employment. This is a widespread phenomenon everywhere in Europe, particularly in construction.
Exactly. Actually many people in trade jobs (construction, hairdressers, etc) additionally work in illegal employment (or do paid "favors" for acquaintances), at least speaking from my experience as a German in Germany.
This usually has to do with those jobs being too badly paid to attract enough people to do all the available work as well as those jobs not paying a sufficiently livable wage and welfare being tied to unemployment or fully deducting any income 1-to-1. A naive solution would be converting welfare to something of a reverse income tax (so e.g. for every €2 you earn your welfare would be reduced by €1 rather than €2, down to zero, and no income tax would be paid on any income up to 2x of welfare). But politicians seem to be more interested in squeezing welfare recipients harder because they think people who aren't working (legally) must be punished until they start working - nevermind that some of those welfare recipients are not part of the work force due to age or legal status and thus can't legally work.
This only works if it's difficult for migrants to get on welfare. Otherwise you attract migrants who just want to live off welfare, not work, which doesn't contribute to supporting the growing retired population. (Not that migrants should be blamed for this; if you could get a better life for yourself and your family just by moving to a country that paid you for not even having to work, of course it's a rational decision).