4 ms·

The US is absolutely not following Japan. Japan has almost no immigration while the US practically has no borders. Our birthrate is also much closer to replacem

by usrn 4y ago

The US is absolutely not following Japan. Japan has almost no immigration while the US practically has no borders. Our birthrate is also much closer to replacement levels than Japan. Because there are more (and growing) people chasing fewer assets/production the US can easily end up in an inflationary spiral while this is nearly impossible for Japan.

eftychis 4y ago
Well, yes, the birthrates and immigration can help the U.S. but that was not the point the OP was making -- and I am making too -- Japan has showcased boundaries one can reach on relation to debt and fiscal policy; and also that negative interest rates and meddling with rates does not work per se and out of the box.
adventured 4y ago
The US is adding 1.x million people per year, on a decline. The addition is entirely meaningless against the context. The US is also aging persistently, as with most of its peers. Exaggerated, your premise rests on: the US is not exactly like the Japan scenario, it's 98-99% like the Japan scenario. Point being, that tiny population expansion is trivial and will be mostly gone soon anyway. The population addition in question is majority lower income, lower education oriented in numbers. The US has an inverted immigration system vs eg Canada or Australia (they focus on higher income, higher education, skill-based immigration). That fact further debases the potency / value of the population expansion. US education has been eroding for decades in terms of quality, so those lower income, lower education new immigrants are entering the US at a particularly mediocre time for their purposes (and they'll also simultaneously run into the automation, robotics, AI buzzsaw that is in the first or second inning; further devaluing what that population expansion brings to the table).
- usrn 4y ago
  Japan still managed to keep a lot of their culture and demographics intact. When the US enters the decline it's going to be much much more serious.
- selimthegrim 4y ago
  So I guess the 2/3rd foreigner STEM grad students are “lower education oriented”?
  - adventured 4y ago
    2/3 of the US immigration system isn't foreign STEM grads. Not even remotely close. What part of what I said are you actually trying to disagree with? I was very clearly speaking about the overall US immigration system and how it's structured. Foreign STEM grads quite obviously fall into the higher income, higher education, higher skill grouping that (per my prior reference) Canada and Australia prefer to focus the majority of their immigration on (whereas the US does not focus its immigration in such a manner).
    - hartator 4y ago
      > The population addition in question is majority lower income, lower education oriented in numbers. That's absolutely not true, and it sounds like 101 xenophobia. Immigrants in the U.S. are significantly better educated than U.S. natives. Ref: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-finding...
      - dshoemaker 4y ago
        > Immigrants in the U.S. _as a whole have lower levels of education than the U.S._-born population. In 2018, _immigrants were over three times as likely as the U.S. born to have not completed high school_ (27% vs. 8%). However, _immigrants were just as likely as the U.S. born to have a bachelor’s degree or more_ (32% and 33%, respectively). > Educational attainment varies among the nation’s immigrant groups, particularly across immigrants from different regions of the world. Immigrants from Mexico and Central America are less likely to be high school graduates than the U.S. born (54% and 47%, respectively, do not have a high school diploma, vs. 8% of U.S. born). On the other hand, immigrants from every region except Mexico, the Caribbean and Central America were as likely as or more likely than U.S.-born residents to have a bachelor’s or advanced degree. Not the OP you're responding to but your own source disagrees with your assertion. Relevant quotes above, emphasis mine. Also, I'm not against immigration but it gets old seeing accusations of xenophobia when someone is trying to have a reasonable conversation about the very real macro-level challenges involved in immigration. Stifling this sort of discourse also ends up being a disservice to people that have worked very hard to immigrate to the US as it can lead to people sweeping under the rug the challenges people will face when arriving.

by usrn 4y ago

eftychis 4y ago

Well, yes, the birthrates and immigration can help the U.S. but that was not the point the OP was making -- and I am making too -- Japan has showcased boundaries one can reach on relation to debt and fiscal policy; and also that negative interest rates and meddling with rates does not work per se and out of the box.

adventured 4y ago

The US is adding 1.x million people per year, on a decline. The addition is entirely meaningless against the context. The US is also aging persistently, as with most of its peers. Exaggerated, your premise rests on: the US is not exactly like the Japan scenario, it's 98-99% like the Japan scenario. Point being, that tiny population expansion is trivial and will be mostly gone soon anyway. The population addition in question is majority lower income, lower education oriented in numbers. The US has an inverted immigration system vs eg Canada or Australia (they focus on higher income, higher education, skill-based immigration). That fact further debases the potency / value of the population expansion. US education has been eroding for decades in terms of quality, so those lower income, lower education new immigrants are entering the US at a particularly mediocre time for their purposes (and they'll also simultaneously run into the automation, robotics, AI buzzsaw that is in the first or second inning; further devaluing what that population expansion brings to the table).

usrn 4y ago
Japan still managed to keep a lot of their culture and demographics intact. When the US enters the decline it's going to be much much more serious.
selimthegrim 4y ago
So I guess the 2/3rd foreigner STEM grad students are “lower education oriented”?
- adventured 4y ago
  2/3 of the US immigration system isn't foreign STEM grads. Not even remotely close. What part of what I said are you actually trying to disagree with? I was very clearly speaking about the overall US immigration system and how it's structured. Foreign STEM grads quite obviously fall into the higher income, higher education, higher skill grouping that (per my prior reference) Canada and Australia prefer to focus the majority of their immigration on (whereas the US does not focus its immigration in such a manner).
  - hartator 4y ago
    > The population addition in question is majority lower income, lower education oriented in numbers. That's absolutely not true, and it sounds like 101 xenophobia. Immigrants in the U.S. are significantly better educated than U.S. natives. Ref: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/20/key-finding...
    - dshoemaker 4y ago
      > Immigrants in the U.S. _as a whole have lower levels of education than the U.S._-born population. In 2018, _immigrants were over three times as likely as the U.S. born to have not completed high school_ (27% vs. 8%). However, _immigrants were just as likely as the U.S. born to have a bachelor’s degree or more_ (32% and 33%, respectively). > Educational attainment varies among the nation’s immigrant groups, particularly across immigrants from different regions of the world. Immigrants from Mexico and Central America are less likely to be high school graduates than the U.S. born (54% and 47%, respectively, do not have a high school diploma, vs. 8% of U.S. born). On the other hand, immigrants from every region except Mexico, the Caribbean and Central America were as likely as or more likely than U.S.-born residents to have a bachelor’s or advanced degree. Not the OP you're responding to but your own source disagrees with your assertion. Relevant quotes above, emphasis mine. Also, I'm not against immigration but it gets old seeing accusations of xenophobia when someone is trying to have a reasonable conversation about the very real macro-level challenges involved in immigration. Stifling this sort of discourse also ends up being a disservice to people that have worked very hard to immigrate to the US as it can lead to people sweeping under the rug the challenges people will face when arriving.