3 ms·

I am so confused about how this topic is discussed. I think it's completely backwards. If I was a nationalist in any country with roughly the demographic shape

I am so confused about how this topic is discussed. I think it's completely backwards. If I was a nationalist in any country with roughly the demographic shape of Germany (so, most of the wealthy ones), I would regard open immigration as the highest possible leverage move, to the point, where I (not, in fact, being a nationalist) actually feel bad about the devastating effects this is ultimately going to have a few years down the line for the countries these people are leaving behind. Bar an AI miracle, everyone is going to need bodies, and the bodies they are going to produce, to avoid societal breakdown. By current looks, it is potentially the scarcest resource of the future. I understand that immigration of unskilled people is a little off from the "skilled immigration" pipe dream and less convenient, but are people really that confused about the slightly longer term and exponentially scarier cost of no immigration? These countries have a system that, while not perfect, is the most excellent at creating skilled enough humans. Letting anyone willing and able to produce a child in the country, that you can then pump through that system, is the absolute cheapest and most realistic way you are ever going to get the amount of bodies you are going to need to avoid a total demographic disaster.

voisin 3y ago
Canada is struggling with this now. There is a balance between fixing demographic issues, and exacerbating existing inequality (housing-haves vs have-nots) and infrastructure inadequacies (our medical system is failing with too few doctors, nurses, etc to support existing population, let alone all the newcomers). So it isn’t like opening the immigration floodgates is a magic bullet. There are definitely growing pains and it ideally is something that is phased in rather than a sudden reaction to a problem that should’ve been foreseen for decades.
- jstummbillig 3y ago
  > So it isn’t like opening the immigration floodgates is a magic bullet. It is not painless, but, for all intents an purposes, it is magic. Chemotherapy. Right now it really sucks, but, bar an actual (as far as I can tell) unforeseeable miracle, it is the only thing that is going to keep your system alive in a few years, Either you do the chemo now, or you are going to have a really bad time later. Right this second you might not feel the cancer, while the drug hits you hard. But are people really that confused about what it is going to happen if they refuse? The west can obviously always hope for wars to rage on, to at least have people at the then open door. Fingers crossed. But People will not be so super excited to leave Africa in, oh I don't know, 10 years or so. Living conditions are improving and people are actually not that excited about leaving a country, if everything is pretty okay in that country. Of course you are right, that does not make it easy and it could have been a lot simpler. That would have required foresight. Not our forte. Alas.
pseudo0 3y ago
This take is completely ludicrous. If anything, first-world countries have a problem with an oversupply of labor, as demonstrated by stagnant real wages and weak labor force participation rates. Automation will only amplify this trend. Also, Denmark has studied this issue extensively and found that "non-Western" immigration actually imposes additional burdens on the state, costing over $10k per year per migrant. Having a young population that doesn't work is even worse than having an inverted population pyramid, and that's without getting into the qualitative damage to social cohesion and trust caused by mass migration. https://www.thelocal.dk/20211015/denmark-says-non-western-immigrants-cost-state-31-billion-kroner https://www.thelocal.dk/20211015/denmark-says-non-western-im... https://archive.fo/DU17J https://archive.fo/DU17J
- jstummbillig 3y ago
  Unfortunately, I can not read the paper but according to the article, the study you are citing reviews the cost of immigration, not the cost of not-immigration. (10k/year for the opportunity to move a body through your education system sounds like a pretty good deal though in this context) > an oversupply of labor, as demonstrated by stagnant real wages and weak labor force participation rates How do weak labor force participation rates indicate an oversupply in labor?
  - pseudo0 3y ago
    Most non-Western migrants are male, 18-30, have no knowledge of Danish and minimal education. Women and children generally wait around in UN refugee camps rather than take a long and dangerous trip to Europe. You aren't getting children, you are getting adults who will need years of remedial education to function at a high school level. > How do weak labor force participation rates indicate an oversupply in labor? It means people either can't find work, or the work available is so unattractive that it is preferable not to work. In a tight labor market employers will offer better pay, flexibility, hire less desirable workers, etc. OECD stats linked below, for ages 24-64 it's under 80% for OECD countries on average. And that includes part-time and underemployed workers. https://data.oecd.org/emp/labour-force-participation-rate.htm https://data.oecd.org/emp/labour-force-participation-rate.ht...

voisin 3y ago

Canada is struggling with this now. There is a balance between fixing demographic issues, and exacerbating existing inequality (housing-haves vs have-nots) and infrastructure inadequacies (our medical system is failing with too few doctors, nurses, etc to support existing population, let alone all the newcomers). So it isn’t like opening the immigration floodgates is a magic bullet. There are definitely growing pains and it ideally is something that is phased in rather than a sudden reaction to a problem that should’ve been foreseen for decades.

jstummbillig 3y ago
> So it isn’t like opening the immigration floodgates is a magic bullet. It is not painless, but, for all intents an purposes, it is magic. Chemotherapy. Right now it really sucks, but, bar an actual (as far as I can tell) unforeseeable miracle, it is the only thing that is going to keep your system alive in a few years, Either you do the chemo now, or you are going to have a really bad time later. Right this second you might not feel the cancer, while the drug hits you hard. But are people really that confused about what it is going to happen if they refuse? The west can obviously always hope for wars to rage on, to at least have people at the then open door. Fingers crossed. But People will not be so super excited to leave Africa in, oh I don't know, 10 years or so. Living conditions are improving and people are actually not that excited about leaving a country, if everything is pretty okay in that country. Of course you are right, that does not make it easy and it could have been a lot simpler. That would have required foresight. Not our forte. Alas.

pseudo0 3y ago

This take is completely ludicrous. If anything, first-world countries have a problem with an oversupply of labor, as demonstrated by stagnant real wages and weak labor force participation rates. Automation will only amplify this trend. Also, Denmark has studied this issue extensively and found that "non-Western" immigration actually imposes additional burdens on the state, costing over $10k per year per migrant. Having a young population that doesn't work is even worse than having an inverted population pyramid, and that's without getting into the qualitative damage to social cohesion and trust caused by mass migration. https://www.thelocal.dk/20211015/denmark-says-non-western-immigrants-cost-state-31-billion-kroner https://www.thelocal.dk/20211015/denmark-says-non-western-im... https://archive.fo/DU17J https://archive.fo/DU17J

jstummbillig 3y ago
Unfortunately, I can not read the paper but according to the article, the study you are citing reviews the cost of immigration, not the cost of not-immigration. (10k/year for the opportunity to move a body through your education system sounds like a pretty good deal though in this context) > an oversupply of labor, as demonstrated by stagnant real wages and weak labor force participation rates How do weak labor force participation rates indicate an oversupply in labor?
- pseudo0 3y ago
  Most non-Western migrants are male, 18-30, have no knowledge of Danish and minimal education. Women and children generally wait around in UN refugee camps rather than take a long and dangerous trip to Europe. You aren't getting children, you are getting adults who will need years of remedial education to function at a high school level. > How do weak labor force participation rates indicate an oversupply in labor? It means people either can't find work, or the work available is so unattractive that it is preferable not to work. In a tight labor market employers will offer better pay, flexibility, hire less desirable workers, etc. OECD stats linked below, for ages 24-64 it's under 80% for OECD countries on average. And that includes part-time and underemployed workers. https://data.oecd.org/emp/labour-force-participation-rate.htm https://data.oecd.org/emp/labour-force-participation-rate.ht...