I'm anti-immigration. Change my mind.

Author: spacetime

Posts

Total: 58
1harderthanyouthink
1harderthanyouthink's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 256
0
1
3
1harderthanyouthink's avatar
1harderthanyouthink
0
1
3
Low-skill worker immigration is almost entirely bad because it serves to lower wage and labour standards, and it often puts people at risk for human trafficking and coercion.

High-skill worker immigration is fine. It helps keep the United States from having shortages in necessary capacities.

But if someone wants to immigrate to America, ethnonationalism isn't the way to go in arguments on that matter. It has no logical historical basis for the country.

9 days later

mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@spacetime
So there you have it. Change my mind!

Immigration is inherently based on reality of two or more nation/states.

A scenario involving a unified Earth nation/state, immigrant is an irrelevant word or concept, unless mind-accessing extra-terrestrial begin arriving.

Do prefer a scenario of a less unified Earth with a future that is of an increasing number of nations/states, or a unified Earth where concept of immigration is moot/irrelevant concept/word?

We each have a choice to make in the direction we want humanity to move towards. Integration towards unification, as one integrated humanity, or not.

I hope you will open your mind --more considerate--  as much, or more, than change your mind.






thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,005
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
“The main benefit is that immigrant workers fill domestic labor shortages, by taking jobs that native-born American workers can't/won't take.“

Even this argument isn’t that compelling. I addressed this in my (unfortunately deleted) debate with Tej. The USA is simply too big and (economically) diverse to just generalize that there’s a labor shortage. There’s a reason wages in the North Dakota oil fields are so high—it’s an extremely low population state and no one wants to move there to do a dirty and dangerous job. So wages have to go up to encourage people to relocate. If every position in an undesirable or undeveloped part of the country can be filed with an immigrant Americans will never be able to take advantage of localized labor shortages. 

As for jobs Americans “won’t do”...I’m very skeptical. Those jobs were done pre-1965. Systemic unemployment is a very real issue, workforce participation for prime age males has fallen off a cliff and each year more and more people are on disability, even though medicine continues to advance. The problem is simply that wages in jobs like construction are too low for Americans to take, especially if you have an out such as SSDI. Cut off immigration and these wages will have to go up. Labor costs would go up too, but by how much? I don’t think it would be nearly enough to offset the massive social dysfunction caused by a large subset of our average to low skilled workers being cut out of the workforce entirely. Any argument about how a massive increase in the supply of labor doesn’t drive down wages is pure sophistry. 

Economists say that limiting immigration is bad economics because immigrants spur demand. I suspect that if this is true, immigration restriction is bad economics in the same way that tariffs are bad economics. Maybe the total amount of wealth decreases, but how has the distribution changed? To me it seems that mass immigration ends up being a wealth transfer from the bottom and the middle to the very top. 

Spacetime already addressed the societal issues with mass immigration in the OP, but it’s worth pointing out that even if the extremely simplistic “melting pot” model is accurate...so what? What if I don’t want to live in a “melting pot” where my grandchildren’s culture isn’t recognizable to me?




Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@thett3
Any country that has any kind of open welfare system will eventually be destroyed with an open border policy. The price a nation pays for having a welfare state is controlled borders if they wish to survive as a nation. Europe is discovering this, and the economic effects have not even come close to being realized. There is no infrastructure in place to take care of the welfare refugees, and once the money is drained to fix that infrastructure problem, it must be paid with a staggering debt. Let's hope America keeps a strong military while Europe declines.

One of the main reasons for the massive horde of homeless people is the lack of infrastructure to accommodate the illegal immigrants swelling the streets of the sanctuary cities. California does not have the resources or manpower to even control basic human feces piling up around the homeless tent cities. This is the fate of open borders mixed with welfare. If we were to eliminate state welfare and run the country like we did with open borders in 1900, there would be no homeless problem like we have today in sanctuary states, because people would not just show up at Ellis Island expecting to kick back and take it easy.
 

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@thett3
Also, don't let anyone tell you that demand creates jobs. Capital creates jobs, not demand. If there's not enough capital, then swelling of the streets of your sanctuary city will surely turn your hometown into Brazil. Plenty of demand and yet no jobs there.

People have this idea that people with capital are just swimming in it like scrooge McDuck, when in fact, it's all accounted for and appropriately invested already in stable ventures. Investors are not going to gamble on illegal labor if they find it too risky. Nobody with money is flocking to California to invest in the massive amounts of human capital lounging about in the tent cities, regardless of demand. It's just too risky, and there is no likely return on investment. More homeless won't change that reality.
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,005
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Greyparrot
yeah, most of the pro immigration arguments just come off as sophistry to me. On the surface level they make sense but get weaker and weaker the more you dive into them. I didn’t even get started on how this massive influx destroys social capital

mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@thett3
We each have a choice to make in the direction we want humanity to move towards.

Integration towards unification, as one integrated humanity Earthian nation/state, or remain splintered.

Divided and conquered by our own but forward into the future stupidity.

The browning of humanity is continuing to happen,  much to chagrin of many whites.

Love conquers all. Hate destroys all.





Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@mustardness
Integration is not enforced in this country. Diversity is.
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
Mass immigration is a multifaceted problem rooted in global capitalism, hegemonic power constrained by nuclear considerations, and the scale of society in the United States. The interested parties behind global capitalism want to maximize the fluidity of both capital and labor to buffer their own considerable power. The US needs to project its interests through proxy conflicts in non-nuclear countries, which are usually ruined in some sense, creating large populations amenable to relocation out of necessity. And economic and social scaling problems cause deep problems in first world countries, which ultimately remain unaddressed and lead to escapism, which fuels consumerism and things like drug use and hedonism, coupled with either political disengagement or hyperengagement. This dysfunction leads to immigration policies which range from incoherent to malevolent, and because our government doesn't really reflect accurately the will of its people any more the result is populist backlash when changing demographics make escapism difficult. The same people who claim that mass immigration is just the path to a Star Trek utopia have a terrible track record of predicting things, and that trend is likely to continue. Proximity, diversity, and unclear boundaries or cultural norms is a recipe for disaster, and that's clearly where we are headed.
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,005
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@mustardness
I can’t begin to comprehend how naive one would have to be to look at history think that a united “Earthian” race is even a remote possibility, let alone inevitable, but here we are. Just saying that you think something is going to happen eventually isn’t an argument for why we should do it. Policy should be decided based on how it effects the populace, not some abstract moral ideal about the “browning” of the world 
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Integration is not enforced in this country. Diversity is.
Browning of humaniity is resultant of diverstity. Its called sex.

Your immunity to truth stems from immoral Trumpanzee proclivities.

The only policies Trumpanzees are those that value truth.

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@thett3
Hell, you can't get people with any similar shade of skin to agree on anything. Poking out your eyeballs or turning everyone brown won't change science.

What is up with these "magical skin" people thinking humanity will be all hunkie dorie once everyone has the same shade of skin?
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@thett3
not some abstract moral ideal about the “browning” of the world 

That you think the ongoing  browning of humanity is an abstract and not reality is further evidence that your living in a bubble of non-truths that is immune to truth ever penetrating your denial-of-truth bubble. Sad :--(

This is typical Trumpanzee past-time and there is long list of those.

Deny deny deny.

Humanity is not browning.  

Obama was born in USA.

Tiny improvement of wages and inclined job growth is resultant of Obama polices and been rising for years.

Swamp of white house and republican poliiticians has been growing not draining.

Idio-ump has distorted reality with more lies than any other president in since Nixon.

Idio-ump has more criminal and civil law suits filed against him  --and won-- than any other president since Nixon.

Ido-ump does did not have largest inagural crowds ever.

Made hush money payments to at least two women and repeatedly lied about so as to not hurt his chances to become president.

OMG the list of lies and repeated lies by this narccisstic, immoral, bigoted, racist nutcase is more than any other president ever.

Kim Young Poo is still a nuclear danger and is trying to conceal its increasing  nuclear program.

Putin attacked/jhacked americas voting system to get trump into office and admitted on national tv he wanted trump as president.

The list of denials by Trumpanzees in regards to this most lying ever president is too long for me to list in one sitting.



ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@mustardness
Dude, you have Asperger's, and it isn't even the fun kind.
spacetime
spacetime's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 206
0
1
3
spacetime's avatar
spacetime
0
1
3
I've actually revised my beliefs on this a bit since the last time I posted here:

1. Labor shortages are bullshit. Having done some more research, I think businesses could easily fill all their alleged labor shortages by raising wages and offering more training. There wouldn't be any "jobs Americans can't/won't do" if businesses were willing to invest more resources into hiring American workers. Immigrant-dominated industries (e.g. agriculture) have only become immigrant-dominated by virtue of immigrant workers pushing American workers out of those industries. In other words, any level of immigration is going to introduce competition into the job market and harm American workers.

2. That being said, immigration can still be justified on economic grounds. It's a net benefit to the economy in the same way that free trade is: by improving efficiency of production and drastically reducing the prices of goods and services for all consumers. Immigration and free trade displace a subset of American workers, but in doing so, they benefit everyone by boosting purchasing power (i.e. raising real wages). 

3. I'm still anti-immigration because of its impact on social cohesion. And the economic displacement of so many American workers only exacerbates that impact.
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
.."Dude, you have Asperger's, and it isn't even the fun kind."...

I have fur-burger symptoms. Classic male syndrome.

I'm happy to see thatf emale immigrants are on the rise.

US needs more women and more women in power.

Humanity needs more women in powerful positions.

Women { cry } are attractors, like gravity, they contractor inward to pull family together as integral whole

Men { fry } are pushers and are best when managed  by women. 







15 days later

spacetime
spacetime's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 206
0
1
3
spacetime's avatar
spacetime
0
1
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Also, don't let anyone tell you that demand creates jobs. Capital creates jobs, not demand. If there's not enough capital, then swelling of the streets of your sanctuary city will surely turn your hometown into Brazil. Plenty of demand and yet no jobs there.

They're both important. It's true that demand without capital is useless. But capital without demand is useless too. Demand is what ensures the profitability of capital investments. Nobody is gonna start or expand a business (i.e. create job/wage growth) unless they know there's demand for that business's product.

There are two sides to the equation, and I don't understand why people insist on ignoring one side or the other on the basis of their partisan affiliation.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@spacetime
Because you don't have to manufacture demand, but you have to engineer capital. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@spacetime
There's a lot of progressive thought out there still that government has an obligation to manufacture demand, but it is repeatedly debunked through the broken window fallacy.

I strongly urge you to deeply research the broken window fallacy before you advocate for government to create demand through things like wars and open borders.
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Immigration been lower and lower for years.

Demand for needed worker is as great or greater than ever.

What jobs needs to be accomplished in USA and other countries is greater than ever.

Who ever thinks there is no demand for workers or no need and living in fantasy land of denial.

Pretty much those 62 million  Trumpanzees who voted for idio-ump
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@mustardness
Demand for workers is a good thing...it causes low unemployment and high wages.


Broken windows does not cause these things.
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Demand for workers is a good thing...it causes low unemployment and high wages.

Broken windows does not cause these things.
Yeah and gives jobs to poorer people who want to work.

Lets see do we know any poor people want to work?

Oh yeah the immigrans whose numbers have been declining for years.

Trumpanzees are in denial of the facts/truths.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@mustardness
Wow so you are for controlled borders. I never took you for a Trumpanzee.
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Wow so you are for controlled borders. I never took you for a Trumpanzee.
Ive never stated otherwise.  I'm firm believer in governmental regulation/moderation.

So no need for you to play mind games.  Makes you look foolish and also makes you look like this alternative fact, as follows;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah and gives jobs to poorer people who want to work.

Lets see do we know any poor people want to work?

Oh yeah the immigrants whose numbers have been declining for years.

Trumpanzees are in denial of the facts/truths and largest producer of alternative facts. Thanky miss conway you may return to your seat now.

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,313
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@mustardness
Well...here is your official Trumpanzee card then... 
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Unlike you, Ive earned no Trumpanzee card never will like you have.

Your lack of immoral integrity is proof of you earning your Trumpanzee card.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ive never stated otherwise.  I'm firm believer in governmental regulation/moderation.

So no need for you to play mind games.  Makes you look foolish and also makes you look like this alternative fact, as follows;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah and gives jobs to poorer people who want to work.

Lets see do we know any poor people want to work?

Oh yeah the immigrants whose numbers have been declining for years.

Trumpanzees are in denial of the facts/truths and largest producer of alternative facts. Thanky miss conway you may return to your seat now.


junglemedicine
junglemedicine's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2
0
0
0
junglemedicine's avatar
junglemedicine
0
0
0
I don't understand what you mean by "anti-immigration." Are you against any immigration to the US? That sounds absurd when thought about properly. Like, the success of any economy hinges to some degree on the ability to attract the best and most productive immigrants, and especially in our liquid globalized economy. To be sure, I think there's a lot of problems with our current immigration system, but there's a big difference between saying you're anti-immigration and simply voicing concerns about different immigration models. For instance, I'm not anti-immigration (again, that position is absurd) but I definitely have concerns about the porousness of our borders. Two different things. It's like distinguishing between immigration and invasions. Invasions and forced visits are obviously bad. Immigrants aren't. 

In terms of immigration, it's important to understand that almost all immigrants are high-skilled and almost all cherish the opportunity to integrate. Immigrants want to integrate more than they want a high-paying job. And in fact, that's why they come to the US over other countries, and it's why immigrants move to Texas or California or Florida while staying out of Arkansas or Mississippi. Immigrants look for environments that are receptive, where the locals make an effort to integrate. So the idea that immigration (and again, we're not talking about invasion or forced visits here) hurts social stability is just wrong when you look at the reality of how immigrants choose where to immigrate. If the locality sucks, immigrants won't stay. And that's something that a lot of these insular people who demur at crossing literal bridges (safe, sound, and in the same country) don't understand. Luckily, insular people are a very small minority in this country (most Americans aren't anti-immigrant, and most Americans are incredibly receptive to immigrants when compared with other countries). 

As for labor shortages and low-skilled labor, that has nothing to do with it. The vast majority of immigration is high-skilled (or should be - the point is to attract the best immigrants). There's a lot of illegal immigration in this country, but that's a separate issue. I'd suggest that part of the reason there's so much illegal immigration is because our whole system is sort of medieval (we've got that insane lottery system, for example, which just gives more chance for criminals to come in) but my overall point is that a blanket anti-immigration position doesn't reflect the reality of this country or its interests. 
spacetime
spacetime's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 206
0
1
3
spacetime's avatar
spacetime
0
1
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Because you don't have to manufacture demand, but you have to engineer capital. 
That's not true. Demand is contingent on factors such as disposable income and consumer confidence. Those are both factors the government can influence.


I strongly urge you to deeply research the broken window fallacy before you advocate for government to create demand through things like wars and open borders.
... I don't think I even vaguely implied that I support "wars and open borders" as a way to boost demand.