4 ms·
Sometimes it's useful to look at the most extreme version of the problem. So instead of, say, tweaks to H1-B, imagine a world where we did open the borders and
by ahupp 6y ago
Sometimes it's useful to look at the most extreme version of the problem. So instead of, say, tweaks to H1-B, imagine a world where we did open the borders and gave everyone who wanted one a plane ticket and a US work visa. Economists would say that this would greatly increase aggregate world GDP, and they are probably right.
But its not clear that existing American workers would be better off. The usual claim is that all these new workers create more demand and thus more jobs for everyone. But that only holds in industries that scale employment linearly with demand. Most of the people on HN are not in that sort of job.
I think immigration is hugely beneficial for the US, but we should be wary of simplistic arguments from economics.
BTW, the book "Open Borders: the science and ethics of immigration" is a great quick read on this topic. I disagree with its conclusions but I'm glad I read it.
- avs733 6y agoThe existing us worker is far less negatively impacted by foreign workers than they are by capitalism and antilabor organizing. My favorite stats are around wage theft. Wage theft is the dominant form of theft in this country, but is not a felony. People rot in jail for years for stealing food...no one goes to jail for wage theft.
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoWage Theft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_theft Millions of workers lose billions in stolen wages every year—nearly as much as all other property theft: https://www.gq.com/story/wage-theft https://www.gq.com/story/wage-theft
- logicchains 6y ago>But its not clear that existing American workers would be better off. There's actually a relatively noncontroversial theorem in mainstream economics that suggests with free migration (or trade), the wages of less-skilled workers in the richer country will fall, and in the poorer country will rise, until they meet in the middle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_price_equalization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_price_equalization. Economists still consider the outcome to overall be positive because the workers in the poor country gain more than those in the rich country lose, and both benefit from increased productivity growth in the long term.
- ahupp 6y agoOr as Snow Crash put it: “When it gets down to it — talking trade balances here — once we've brain-drained all our technology into other countries, once things have evened out, they're making cars in Bolivia and microwave ovens in Tadzhikistan and selling them here — once our edge in natural resources has been made irrelevant by giant Hong Kong ships and dirigibles that can ship North Dakota all the way to New Zealand for a nickel — once the Invisible Hand has taken away all those historical inequities and smeared them out into a broad global layer of what a Pakistani brickmaker would consider to be prosperity — y'know what? There's only four things we do better than anyone else: music movies microcode (software) high-speed pizza delivery”
- nafey 6y agoOff topic but would you suggest reading Snow Crash. Its from 1990s and i was wondering if it would still be relevant.
- nathancahill 6y agoSnow Crash is a fantastic piece of literature. That's like asking if Tolkien is still relevant today since it was written in the 1950s.
- evgen 6y agoWhile Snow Crash has its problems (like the standard Stephenson 'ending? what ending?') everyone should read the first chapter. That chapter on its own is a work of art.
- ahupp 6y agoI haven't read it for years, but from what I remember it would hold up well. Definitely worth a read.
- asdff 6y agoThat's not what we see in the U.S., a region of free migration and trade with regional anchors moving in differing directions based on unique variables for each region. There is no normalization going on, but further stratification.
- zhoujianfu 6y agoI think Universal Basic Income (plus grandfathering) would be the way to solve this conflict. We want higher overall productivity and value, but entrenched interests will fight it, if they have something to lose. So to make it politically feasible we need to protect their interests (temporarily), and going forward allow everybody to participate in the global improvements (via a UBI)..