8 ms·

Thiel has opposed mass [1] immigration to the United States which should not be mistaken with opposition to all immigration. For context, only 15% of new lawfu

Thiel has opposed mass [1] immigration to the United States which should not be mistaken with opposition to all immigration. For context, only 15% of new lawful permanent residents in 2014 were selected for education or skill (the employment-preference category). [1] like (but not limited to) anyone who likes strolling over the border or overstaying visas

vkou 10y ago
The net immigration rate to the US is 0.38%. That's hardly 'mass immigration.' I take it that means he's happy with the status quo? And, if not, when is he going back to Germany?
- falsestprophet 10y ago
  10% of the California workforce is undocumented 5% of the national workforce is undocumented
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - vkou 10y ago
    ... 5% of the working age population, accumulated over the span of decades isn't massive. The fabric of civil society isn't about to unravel.
- winter_blue 10y ago
  Yes, most people don't realize that the U.S. actually has a super low 0.38% immigrate rate. It's truly extreme xenophobia and racism that these liars who falsely claim "mass immigration" can't tolerate the tiny 0.38% that comes to the U.S. every year. They see a few immigrants in their neighborhoods, and their blood immediately starts to boil, and they get filled up with loathing and hatred. They are total hypocrites, who ignore that most of their ancestors came here in the last 200 years[2], and a disgrace to this country and its immigrant heritage. I hypothesize that there would no complaining if 100% of the immigrants who came here were white Europeans. At the root, it's not about immigration -- it's just plain racism. [1] As Sam Altman of Y Combinator aptly put it: "most Americans saying no immigration are here because their families immigrated in the last 200 years", c.f. https://twitter.com/sama/status/550110475199848448 https://twitter.com/sama/status/550110475199848448
  - randothrowaway 10y ago
    >They are total hypocrites Maybe they are angry because people are coming illegally.
    - vkou 10y ago
      You're right - a descendant of French immigrants has quite the leg to stand on. After all, his great-grandparents legally entered the country... At the time when undesirables, like Chinese, Indians, and the Polish were barred from entry. But at least the Frenchmen came legally! Sure, entry was granted under an extremely racist immigration law, but the legality is what gives him the moral high ground to stand on.
      - randothrowaway 10y ago
        Under your rational then you should be pro building a wall as currently illegal immigration is a default "racist" policy that encourages those from central America while discriminating against Indians and Chinese. Build the wall and regulate immigration so more Indians and Chinese come relative to their world population.
        vkou 10y ago
        Current immigration policy is racist, yes. It's dehumanizing to the people here illegally, and it's not fair by any means. My point is that legality is a fig leaf. When your definition for "legally" is "My ancestors got on a boat, and were white," it holds no weight. "Hurr, durr, build a wall to keep them out", and "Keep America Christian" does nothing to resolve it. If you actually give a shit about either, then backing Trump (Or the other big names from the 2016 Republican line) is backing the wrong horse. Even more ironically, two of the other candidates (Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio) are the descendants of Cuban refugees... And any Cuban entering the US can immediately apply for permanent residency. No questions asked. Strangely, they oppose the same privilege to people fleeing repression/drug cartels/terrible poverty in the rest of Central America.
      - deleted 10y ago
- Houshalter 10y ago
  1 out of 8 people in the US are immigrants. That's the highest it's ever been in recent history. And more than enough to have a big effect on the economy.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
bko 10y ago
> The billionaire tech investor has been a staunch opponent of immigration. Back in 2008, Gawker found that Thiel had donated $1 million to NumbersUSA, an anti-immigration group that has consistently been labelled racist and a firm fan of active population control. ... > He then invested in the SeaSteading Institute which wanted to turn Thiel’s dream into a reality. The reason? He felt the government wasn’t doing enough to keep Silicon Valley stocked with foreign talent. [0] Some mixed messaging here... [0] http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/05/10/shouldnt-surprised-peter-thiels-secret-crush-donald-trump/#gref http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/05/10/shouldnt-surprised-...
- bruceb 10y ago
  It isn't you are just changing the mix of who is coming. One could argue that decrease low skilled immigration and upping higher skilled immigration would boost those at the bottom. Raising wages at the bottom while reducing the price of some more complex services.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - bko 10y ago
    I guess it's under the whole idea the immigration drives down wages. It's likely true that it does drive down wages for certain individuals but the net impact is at worse break even. Wages are an expense after-all, and if you cut the expense and prices go down, everyone benefits by at least the amount that the price had dropped. Some lose out by losing their job so their losses would be offset by the gains of others by having lower prices. This ignores the fact that more people are buying the product at the lower price. And this also assumes that markets are competitive and that the company can't just continue to charge the same price and pocket the difference, which I don't think is unreasonable in a competitive market economy. So the many get lower prices, and pay taxes that compensate the concentrated few that are affected by the job losses or lower wages.
    - Houshalter 10y ago
throwaway13337 10y ago
As some of the siblings point out, it seems like a contradiction that he complains about the lack of tech workers but also is against mass immigration. These aren't actually opposing when you look deeper - the US does not provide much of a means of legal immigration for high skilled worker. On the other hand, the US also does not restrict illegal immigration so much - it's easy to get a menial job, a driver's license, just about everything without a legal visa status. In essence, you have a defacto second class citizen type immigration with a very limited first class immigration ability of the US. Probably this is the opposite of what would benefit the country most.
vkou 10y ago
Illegal immigration is not mass immigration. This is dog-whistle politics, that conveniently conflates opposition to something illegal, with something very appealing to xenophobes.

vkou 10y ago

The net immigration rate to the US is 0.38%. That's hardly 'mass immigration.' I take it that means he's happy with the status quo? And, if not, when is he going back to Germany?

falsestprophet 10y ago
10% of the California workforce is undocumented 5% of the national workforce is undocumented
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- vkou 10y ago
  ... 5% of the working age population, accumulated over the span of decades isn't massive. The fabric of civil society isn't about to unravel.
winter_blue 10y ago
Yes, most people don't realize that the U.S. actually has a super low 0.38% immigrate rate. It's truly extreme xenophobia and racism that these liars who falsely claim "mass immigration" can't tolerate the tiny 0.38% that comes to the U.S. every year. They see a few immigrants in their neighborhoods, and their blood immediately starts to boil, and they get filled up with loathing and hatred. They are total hypocrites, who ignore that most of their ancestors came here in the last 200 years[2], and a disgrace to this country and its immigrant heritage. I hypothesize that there would no complaining if 100% of the immigrants who came here were white Europeans. At the root, it's not about immigration -- it's just plain racism. [1] As Sam Altman of Y Combinator aptly put it: "most Americans saying no immigration are here because their families immigrated in the last 200 years", c.f. https://twitter.com/sama/status/550110475199848448 https://twitter.com/sama/status/550110475199848448
- randothrowaway 10y ago
  >They are total hypocrites Maybe they are angry because people are coming illegally.
  - vkou 10y ago
    You're right - a descendant of French immigrants has quite the leg to stand on. After all, his great-grandparents legally entered the country... At the time when undesirables, like Chinese, Indians, and the Polish were barred from entry. But at least the Frenchmen came legally! Sure, entry was granted under an extremely racist immigration law, but the legality is what gives him the moral high ground to stand on.
    - randothrowaway 10y ago
      Under your rational then you should be pro building a wall as currently illegal immigration is a default "racist" policy that encourages those from central America while discriminating against Indians and Chinese. Build the wall and regulate immigration so more Indians and Chinese come relative to their world population.
      - vkou 10y ago
        Current immigration policy is racist, yes. It's dehumanizing to the people here illegally, and it's not fair by any means. My point is that legality is a fig leaf. When your definition for "legally" is "My ancestors got on a boat, and were white," it holds no weight. "Hurr, durr, build a wall to keep them out", and "Keep America Christian" does nothing to resolve it. If you actually give a shit about either, then backing Trump (Or the other big names from the 2016 Republican line) is backing the wrong horse. Even more ironically, two of the other candidates (Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio) are the descendants of Cuban refugees... And any Cuban entering the US can immediately apply for permanent residency. No questions asked. Strangely, they oppose the same privilege to people fleeing repression/drug cartels/terrible poverty in the rest of Central America.
    - deleted 10y ago
Houshalter 10y ago
1 out of 8 people in the US are immigrants. That's the highest it's ever been in recent history. And more than enough to have a big effect on the economy.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

bko 10y ago

> The billionaire tech investor has been a staunch opponent of immigration. Back in 2008, Gawker found that Thiel had donated $1 million to NumbersUSA, an anti-immigration group that has consistently been labelled racist and a firm fan of active population control. ... > He then invested in the SeaSteading Institute which wanted to turn Thiel’s dream into a reality. The reason? He felt the government wasn’t doing enough to keep Silicon Valley stocked with foreign talent. [0] Some mixed messaging here... [0] http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/05/10/shouldnt-surprised-peter-thiels-secret-crush-donald-trump/#gref http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/05/10/shouldnt-surprised-...

bruceb 10y ago
It isn't you are just changing the mix of who is coming. One could argue that decrease low skilled immigration and upping higher skilled immigration would boost those at the bottom. Raising wages at the bottom while reducing the price of some more complex services.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- bko 10y ago
  I guess it's under the whole idea the immigration drives down wages. It's likely true that it does drive down wages for certain individuals but the net impact is at worse break even. Wages are an expense after-all, and if you cut the expense and prices go down, everyone benefits by at least the amount that the price had dropped. Some lose out by losing their job so their losses would be offset by the gains of others by having lower prices. This ignores the fact that more people are buying the product at the lower price. And this also assumes that markets are competitive and that the company can't just continue to charge the same price and pocket the difference, which I don't think is unreasonable in a competitive market economy. So the many get lower prices, and pay taxes that compensate the concentrated few that are affected by the job losses or lower wages.
  - Houshalter 10y ago

throwaway13337 10y ago

As some of the siblings point out, it seems like a contradiction that he complains about the lack of tech workers but also is against mass immigration. These aren't actually opposing when you look deeper - the US does not provide much of a means of legal immigration for high skilled worker. On the other hand, the US also does not restrict illegal immigration so much - it's easy to get a menial job, a driver's license, just about everything without a legal visa status. In essence, you have a defacto second class citizen type immigration with a very limited first class immigration ability of the US. Probably this is the opposite of what would benefit the country most.

vkou 10y ago

Illegal immigration is not mass immigration. This is dog-whistle politics, that conveniently conflates opposition to something illegal, with something very appealing to xenophobes.