3 ms·

The only reason you would claim they can't "function effectively due to legal status" is that they don't have the status. But they actually do function anyway,

The only reason you would claim they can't "function effectively due to legal status" is that they don't have the status. But they actually do function anyway, and it follows they would function even better with status. Duh. They happen to enter at the least-educated, often unskilled level. This necessarily pushes everyone else up. A CFO that strives to be CEO but couldn't cut it yesterday does today, a director becomes CFO, and so on. This is not rocket science, especially for HN. When you deliberately fail to appreciate direct logical consequences like this, your unbridled disdain for them is showing through. The same is true when you dismiss the countless economic studies that have proven that the overall benefits of immigration exceed the costs to a narrow segment of the labor market. There are very few natives interested in cleaning bathrooms and picking vegetables. They haven't given up on their dream bathroom-cleaning jobs - quite the contrary. They have been able to pursue better jobs because there were immigrants willing to clean bathrooms. Those immigrants created demand for all other products. The table becomes bigger, and everyone scoots over. Again, not rocket science. Something visceral gets activated about this issue, which is why it's ripe for populist con-men to ride it, logic and reason be damned.

ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
You've made a toy model of human economic activity and while I have no doubt you are internally consistent about the rules in your model, that model has no bearing on how human society and economic activity actually work. e.g. In real life, 1 blue collar worker does not get promoted to a white collar job for every 1000 blue collar workers that enter the labor pool after them.
- worstspotgain 2y ago
  In real life, that's actually how the dust settles. The implications of how the economy operates are not on written on a "log of promotions" anywhere. Rather, the system of wages and prices adjusts as needed until people are employed consistently with production functions. If the functions imply we don't need 1100 middle managers, people change jobs and make different education decisions until there are ~1000. There are attritions and transaction costs in the short term, but they cancel out in the medium run. I understand this is inconveniently at odds with your visceral disdain for immigrants, but that's how the law of large numbers shakes out.
  - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
    The data does not support your position. >they cancel out in the medium run If this were true we'd see wages keeping pace with productivity. We'd also see wealth inequality remain constant. The US is famous for neither of those things being true. Your toy model of US economic activity is flawed with respect to real life.
    - worstspotgain 2y ago
      > If this were true we'd see wages keeping pace with productivity. We'd also see wealth inequality remain constant. These are macroeconomic variables that are affected by many factors. The production function argument I made is strictly microeconomic and independent of these.

ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago

You've made a toy model of human economic activity and while I have no doubt you are internally consistent about the rules in your model, that model has no bearing on how human society and economic activity actually work. e.g. In real life, 1 blue collar worker does not get promoted to a white collar job for every 1000 blue collar workers that enter the labor pool after them.

worstspotgain 2y ago
In real life, that's actually how the dust settles. The implications of how the economy operates are not on written on a "log of promotions" anywhere. Rather, the system of wages and prices adjusts as needed until people are employed consistently with production functions. If the functions imply we don't need 1100 middle managers, people change jobs and make different education decisions until there are ~1000. There are attritions and transaction costs in the short term, but they cancel out in the medium run. I understand this is inconveniently at odds with your visceral disdain for immigrants, but that's how the law of large numbers shakes out.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
  The data does not support your position. >they cancel out in the medium run If this were true we'd see wages keeping pace with productivity. We'd also see wealth inequality remain constant. The US is famous for neither of those things being true. Your toy model of US economic activity is flawed with respect to real life.
  - worstspotgain 2y ago
    > If this were true we'd see wages keeping pace with productivity. We'd also see wealth inequality remain constant. These are macroeconomic variables that are affected by many factors. The production function argument I made is strictly microeconomic and independent of these.