4 ms·

>Skilled immigration is an economic home run Your response is tangential to the original point. OP asserts correctly that increasing supply of labor depresses

by dexen 7y ago

>Skilled immigration is an economic home run Your response is tangential to the original point. OP asserts correctly that increasing supply of labor depresses wages, by lowering the negotiating leverage. Your response handwaves it away with "skilled immigration is better for the whole economy". Sorry to burst your bubble - this is a thread about balancing the wages / profits split. OP is right; the higher the supply of labor, the lower the price of labor, thus leaving higher proportion of the surplus as profits. Aka the dreaded inequality. It's fine to prefer profit over wages, if that's how you make your living. But let's not pretend we're for increasing wages while in fact for increasing profit.

dahdum 7y ago
I agreee increasing labor supply can decrease wages. If we allowed uncapped skilled immigration for upper middle class professions like physicians, surgeons, dentists, engineers, scientists, and more their wages may go down or stagnate. Though in a functioning marketplace, costs will go down and production of goods and services will go up. It’s not a zero sum game. I’m not in favor of labor supply protections for any highly paid industry, they are not the segment of society that needs a helping hand.
zamfi 7y ago
But this is all else being equal, which is the “lump of labor” fallacy. It’s not obvious that skilled immigrants have the net effect of reducing the wages of non-immigrants with those same skills — tons of new firms are started by skilled immigrants and/or their kids, and the current SV economic expansion particularly so. So, sure. If you already assume that the pie is of fixed size and a skilled immigrant reduces the work available to others, then you can draw the conclusions you do. But otherwise it’s a weak argument.
jmpman 7y ago
It’s more than that... drive down STEM salaries, and the profits go to the top 1/10 of 1%, but the bottom 50% doesn’t even see that top 1/10 of 1%, so societal stability is preserved, even while the inequality grows even greater (when looking at the top 1/10 of 1% compared to everyone else)

by dexen 7y ago

dahdum 7y ago

I agreee increasing labor supply can decrease wages. If we allowed uncapped skilled immigration for upper middle class professions like physicians, surgeons, dentists, engineers, scientists, and more their wages may go down or stagnate. Though in a functioning marketplace, costs will go down and production of goods and services will go up. It’s not a zero sum game. I’m not in favor of labor supply protections for any highly paid industry, they are not the segment of society that needs a helping hand.

zamfi 7y ago

But this is all else being equal, which is the “lump of labor” fallacy. It’s not obvious that skilled immigrants have the net effect of reducing the wages of non-immigrants with those same skills — tons of new firms are started by skilled immigrants and/or their kids, and the current SV economic expansion particularly so. So, sure. If you already assume that the pie is of fixed size and a skilled immigrant reduces the work available to others, then you can draw the conclusions you do. But otherwise it’s a weak argument.

jmpman 7y ago

It’s more than that... drive down STEM salaries, and the profits go to the top 1/10 of 1%, but the bottom 50% doesn’t even see that top 1/10 of 1%, so societal stability is preserved, even while the inequality grows even greater (when looking at the top 1/10 of 1% compared to everyone else)