Don’t mention it.
No. I’m using an extreme example - two regimes whose defining characteristic was racial domination and racial/ethnic exclusivity couldn’t surrvive without this much detested foreign labor - either immigrants (SA) or conscripted labor from occupied countries (Nazis), making up all sorts of head-spinning explanation to justify this. If they couldn’t survive…
So it illustrates my point that if you want your economy to evolve, you need foreign labor.
Even outside of the US of A who is built on immigration, there are literally hundreds of historical examples how economic growth positively impacted immigration - just to name a few from the last 100 years - Afro-Caribbeans in the UK and Algerians in France, Turks in Germany in the 60ies… Indians in virtually every former British colony…
If you decide against immigration, you have to have a society-wide consensus for economic stagnation. And not many people are ready to see their standard of living drop in order to get less immigrants.
5 Likes
This should be put on a bumper sticker. One very long bumper sticker…
2 Likes
Yes, and Raj is against legal immigration as well (insofar as it is “mass immigration”). His positions make zero sense. He’s an immigrant supportive of nativist policies.
2 Likes
I don’t like that lack of distinction either, but he is arguing against legal immigration here.
1 Like
‘Because it’s always been this way no need to stop’.
[quote=“thunderbolt23, post:1485, topic:218984, full:true”]
Immigration benefits our economy, and benefits our national security.[/quote]
How?
I already pointed out 1/5 of all men age 25-64 aren’t working and there are tons of people living off welfare. Also the lionshare of new jobs are going to immigrants and not people born in the US.
How do immigrants help with national security? You know Obama has imported a million muslims into America during his term right?
It is one of the founding pillars of the most prosperous nations to ever exist…
It’s a part of our culture. I wish you’d just assimilate to our way of life already.
1 Like
Huh? You posted the statistics… Greater than half go to native-born citizens. How is less than half the lion share?
53% > 47%
-
Not all immigrants are created equal - High IQ populations such as Jews, North Asians, and Europeans do much better and have very low rates of welfare use. The US gets most of it’s immigrants from Mexico. By continually importing low IQ migrants, the average IQ of the country declines and the prosperity of the country as a whole declines. Some research has shown if your countries IQ drops below 90 you can no longer have a democracy.
-
You do not take into account the rise of ethnic conflict within borders. Examples
i) gang wars between blacks and hispanics in the US
ii)in Germany there is constant racial tension between the Turks and the Germans
iii)ethnic enclaves in Europe that are now no-go zoned filled predominantly with north Africans and Arab immigrants.
-
Minorities do not vote for conservative principles. Losing 2nd amendment rights is an inevitably if demographics continue to change.
-
At the moment there’s plenty of labour - 1/5 of prime age not working. Let’s get them working first before shuttling in new people.
Pretty sure the founding pillars were focused towards European immigration mostly of British heritage. I remember reading a quote from Benjamin Franklin where he referred to Germans being too “tawny” lol.
Anyways I’d prefer an immigration policy that benefits the country rather than hurts it. It doesn’t matter what’s always been done, it’s what’s best for the nation.
I see the immigration allowed as a means of lowering production costs traditionally - slave labor or third world immigration labor. Both substantially lower than native employment costs in an economically successful country. Hell yeah your standard of living is greater if one of the production cost inputs is minimal.
The rub is when the labor force stays permanently (always), grows far faster than the native population (usually), will not assimilate (sometimes). Lastly - if the host has set up safety nets that are financed by the government taxation - these become stretched to breaking point by having imported some much labor (and their offspring). Thus requiring even more immigration to take the place of the ‘newer’ citizens who won’t do the low level work because they have moved up productivity scale or have the safety net.
Unfortunately enlightened people do not like to acknowledge that humans have a built in us vs them mentality - nations, cities, even neighborhoods seek homogeneity and to find superiority over the next guy.
Your economy has evolved, but are you ready for your culture identity to evolve also?
Ok, so should we tailor our immigration policy to a sliding scale that permits higher percentages of higher IQ populations and limits (prohibits?) lower IQ populations.
I would prefer the US adopt an immigration system similar to Canada’ (a point system to prove that you can benefit Canada) but limit the total number of immigrants to whatever the needs of the US are. I would also not give family related sponsorship an advantage outside of a spouse. I’d also make it harder for employers to convert their sponsored visa employees into green card holders as to not hurt the employment opportunities of citizens and permanent landed immigrants.
The process is already arduous. There are also more positions than qualified candidates of all work authorization statuses. The ones being hurt here are the businesses unable to find qualified resources that they can convert to full time employees that don’t require sponsorship. The business challenges these organizations face are in turn exacerbated because they often go unaddressed or have insufficient resource allocation.
So Trump riles up his supporters by saying “Barak Hussein Obama” founded ISIS. Later when pressed on this his explanation was that Barak Hussin Obama founded ISIS by pulling out of Iraq. Of course Trump explains that he was against the Iraq War from the beginning (“Bush lied, people died”) despite the record reflecting otherwise. But then CNN pulls up transcripts of a Trump interview with Blitzer in which Trump says we should straight up pull out of Iraq. Declare victory and go…
Does he have amnesia? Or, does he not understand that people are actually going to go back and check the record? I ask, because this kind of thing keeps happening with him. Bill’s women, his position at the start of the Iraq war, not knowing who David Duke was, this, and I’m sure other instances not immediately coming to mind.
1 Like
Not to mention people in agriculture are abusing the system by paying illegal and legal migrants slave wages to work their fields while passing on the social costs (medicaid and food stamps) onto society.
Why invest in technological advances when you have wage slaves?
He understands that his supporters don’t care, but apparently doesn’t understand he needs more than his base to win.
2 Likes