5 ms·

How about door 3: only allow immigration for skilled individuals capable of adding outsized value to our economy?

by 15155 2y ago

ben_w 2y ago
As a person who can be described that way: why would I want to migrate to any country whose leaders were elected on a platform of hating migrants? "Oh but not like you, you're one of the good ones!" - imagine yourself being described that way, and ask if that's a crowd you care to spend your time living with.
- anal_reactor 2y ago
  As another skilled immigrant, this is exactly what I want.
- 15155 2y ago
  > why would I want to migrate to any country whose leaders were elected on a platform of hating migrants? "Hating migrants" != "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" Why would you personally want to immigrate to a place where you are immediately expected to foot the bill for everyone else?
  - ben_w 2y ago
    > "Hating migrants" != "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" "Oh but not like you, you're one of the good ones!" - imagine yourself being described that way, and ask if that's a crowd you care to spend your time living with. > Why would you personally want to immigrate to a place where you are immediately expected to foot the bill for everyone else? Because the only places that doesn't describe are those without a functioning government capable of collecting taxes. You want me to migrate to ${your country} to boost the economy? Well, that's only useful to you to the extent it means I'm supporting all the people in your country that can't migrate elsewhere for exactly the same reason.
    - 15155 2y ago
      > "Oh but not like you, you're one of the good ones!" I want to live with people who pull their weight and aren't an immediate financial burden on everyone else, yes. If this is "one of the good ones" vs "one of the bad," so be it. If one is immediately looking to burden everyone else, I can see why one wouldn't want to "spend [their] time living with" folks who don't want to give them free shit. > Because the only places that doesn't describe are those without a functioning government capable of collecting taxes. We're not talking about tax collection, we're talking about how taxes are spent. > You want me to migrate to ${your country} to boost the economy? I don't care why or if you immigrate, but if you do, you will not have a net-negative financial impact on the population. Yes: there are freeloaders amongst the population as-is - this itself isn't a valid reason to import millions more. We're already taking the cream of the crop - which is why H-1B and O-1s visas are a thing. People hiking across the Darién gap aren't magically going to become engineers and doctors.
      - pyrale 2y ago
        > I want to live with people who pull their weight and aren't an immediate financial burden on everyone else, yes. Call us back after you've deported your own parents and children.
      - ben_w 2y ago
        > We're not talking about tax collection, we're talking about how taxes are spent. You're doing both. In every functioning nation, the rich subsidise the poor. I as an above average income earner am necessarily always going to subside the poor no matter where I live — unless it's a place that's got no government. That was true when I lived in the UK, true when I moved to Germany, and would have been true had I moved to the USA instead — all that changed for me was Joe Bloggs became Otto Normalverbraucher instead of Bubba Sixpack. > I don't care why or if you immigrate, but if you do Except you previously wrote "How about door 3: only allow immigration for skilled individuals capable of adding outsized value to our economy?" If you "allow" something but nobody wants to take you up on it, it's not any different than forbidding it. I'm allowing people to donate infinite money to me, but I'm not taking any steps to encourage this or give anyone a reason to. > People hiking across the Darién gap aren't magically going to become engineers and doctors Likewise a degree. In both cases the capability is already a demonstration of being well above average.
  - pyrale 2y ago
    > "Hating migrants" != "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" As a foreigner, I honestly can't see the difference between "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" and "hate foreigners but refrain from saying it to their face if there's a financial incentive". If your tolerance is predicated on me giving you money, I'll pass the opportunity.
    - 15155 2y ago
      My tolerance is predicated on me not giving you money. Spend the money you earn on yourself: it will flow through the rest of the economy. But I am not going to give you any to do so.
      - ben_w 2y ago
        > My tolerance is predicated on me not giving you money. Either: 1) You also don't tolerate the below median earner who is native to your country or 2) Your tolerance is dependent on citizenship not just income If you're #1, that's a problem for your fellow citizens whom you don't tolerate. If you're #2, you're telling me to not bring my higher earning skills to your economy. Doesn't matter if you didn't mean it that way, you still won't get me spending the money I earn on your economy so you won't get rich from me.
        15155 2y ago
        Why can't it be both? Why can't I want to minimize the number of unskilled outsiders (with different values, etc.) because they may cost more while overlooking that fact for those with obvious economic power regardless of where they are from. I know it hurts to hear: people with wealth are desirable guests and citizens. A country's citizenry is much like children: some are going to be shitty, but we still support that limited group because of arbitrary moral obligation (perhaps inspired by the fact that we want our "own" to continue.) We're not obligated to extend this tradition to anyone else for any reason. > you still won't get me spending the money I earn on your economy so you won't get rich from me. Thankfully there are billions of people in the world and they're literally dying to get into the US. H-1Bs quotas are filled every year - there's no shortage of high-average earners wanting to come here, either.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- itsoktocry 2y ago
  >why would I want to migrate to any country whose leaders were elected on a platform of hating migrants? Well, for one: cutting back on illegal immigrants and hating immigrants are not the same thing. Two: stay where you are? I don't get what your expectations are here. Plenty of skilled immigrants love the US. If it's not your cup of tea, that's fine.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    1. Illegal immigration is already illegal. Cutting back on it is tangential to every other statement about promoting, limiting, or targeting migration. 2. I'm responding to a comment that says "How about door 3: only allow immigration for skilled individuals capable of adding outsized value to our economy?" And in my capacity as such a person: that attitude makes me not interested in anything else on the table. Hypothetically to demonstrate the point: You could offer me your entire GDP, even after accounting for a business plan where I somehow specifically help you double it, as pay… and I'd turn you down. Remember that the current state of immigration in the USA is exactly what was being proposed to be changed: the previous desirability is specifically not going to remain.
deniscepko2 2y ago
It works if your existing population is willing to do unskilled labour. Which in my country is not the case
- arandomusername 2y ago
  cheap labour, not unskilled. So what you want is to import third world immigrants so you can pay your plumber cheaply instead of paying them appriopriately.
  - neeleshs 2y ago
    That's the ethos of commerce for thousands of years. Try to pay the least to get the best
- 15155 2y ago
  I love this one because it's so basically obvious: the price for this work will increase or it simply won't happen and wasn't necessary anyway.
  - astrange 2y ago
    You can't get native Americans to do farm work for any amount of money, because they'd have to live in the middle of nowhere near the farm and that's no fun. (That is, you'd have to pay them so much they could buy the farm and then hire someone else to work it. But you're not going to do that.)
    - 15155 2y ago
      The market will take care of this: people will do the work or pay for it or they won't eat.
      - astrange 2y ago
        "They won't eat" is a perfectly possible outcome of this, and a bad one. That is called a recession.
bryanlarsen 2y ago
Studies show you've got it backwards. If you let a nurse or programmer into the country, they're going to take a job that's otherwise filled by an American, depressing skilled wages. If you let in an unskilled laborer, they're going to take a job that nobody wants. They spend those wages, boosting the economy. In both cases, studies show that the number of jobs stays roughly the same; immigrants create about the same amount of jobs as they take. However skilled immigrants decrease average wages, and unskilled immigrants increase average wages. It's the outliers that really tip the balance, though. If one of those immigrants turns out to be Jensen Huang or his parents, that's how you make America great.
- 15155 2y ago
  > Studies show you've got it backwards. If you let a nurse or programmer into the country, they're going to take a job that's otherwise filled by an American, depressing skilled wages. But at that same time they're contributing massive amounts to the tax base, furthering society. Maybe they even start a company, employing more programmers. They also spend their wages. > If you let in an unskilled laborer, they're going to take a job that nobody wants. The price for that work is artificially low because these folks don't have any legal protections of any kind. Guess what else happens commonly to unskilled, under-the-table labor? Injuries! Which I have to pay an outsized amount for in the form of Medicaid and ER fees. How much of their remaining income is remitted straight to their impoverished relatives back home? > If one of those immigrants turns out to be Jensen Huang or his parents Know how to easily filter out Jensen Huang from the crowd of people swimming across the Rio Grande? Marketable skills.
  - bryanlarsen 2y ago
    > How much of their remaining income is remitted straight to their impoverished relatives back home? The skilled labourers do far more of that than unskilled ones. > Guess what else happens commonly to unskilled, under-the-table labor? Injuries! Which I have to pay an outsized amount for in the form of Medicaid and ER fees. The vast majority of the cost of health care is old people, and it's expensive because it's labor intensive. The way to bring health care costs down is to increase the ratio of young people to old people. Which in 2024 means immigration. > Know how to easily filter out Jensen Huang from the crowd of people swimming across the Rio Grande? Marketable skills. Marketable skills like shopkeeper? That's what Jensen Huang's parents were.

How about door 3: only allow immigration for skilled individuals capable of adding outsized value to our economy?

by 15155 2y ago

How about door 3: only allow immigration for skilled individuals capable of adding outsized value to our economy?

As a person who can be described that way: why would I want to migrate to any country whose leaders were elected on a platform of hating migrants? "Oh but not like you, you're one of the good ones!" - imagine yourself being described that way, and ask if that's a crowd you care to spend your time living with.

anal_reactor 2y ago
As another skilled immigrant, this is exactly what I want.
15155 2y ago
> why would I want to migrate to any country whose leaders were elected on a platform of hating migrants? "Hating migrants" != "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" Why would you personally want to immigrate to a place where you are immediately expected to foot the bill for everyone else?
- ben_w 2y ago
  > "Hating migrants" != "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" "Oh but not like you, you're one of the good ones!" - imagine yourself being described that way, and ask if that's a crowd you care to spend your time living with. > Why would you personally want to immigrate to a place where you are immediately expected to foot the bill for everyone else? Because the only places that doesn't describe are those without a functioning government capable of collecting taxes. You want me to migrate to ${your country} to boost the economy? Well, that's only useful to you to the extent it means I'm supporting all the people in your country that can't migrate elsewhere for exactly the same reason.
  - 15155 2y ago
    > "Oh but not like you, you're one of the good ones!" I want to live with people who pull their weight and aren't an immediate financial burden on everyone else, yes. If this is "one of the good ones" vs "one of the bad," so be it. If one is immediately looking to burden everyone else, I can see why one wouldn't want to "spend [their] time living with" folks who don't want to give them free shit. > Because the only places that doesn't describe are those without a functioning government capable of collecting taxes. We're not talking about tax collection, we're talking about how taxes are spent. > You want me to migrate to ${your country} to boost the economy? I don't care why or if you immigrate, but if you do, you will not have a net-negative financial impact on the population. Yes: there are freeloaders amongst the population as-is - this itself isn't a valid reason to import millions more. We're already taking the cream of the crop - which is why H-1B and O-1s visas are a thing. People hiking across the Darién gap aren't magically going to become engineers and doctors.
    - pyrale 2y ago
      > I want to live with people who pull their weight and aren't an immediate financial burden on everyone else, yes. Call us back after you've deported your own parents and children.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      > We're not talking about tax collection, we're talking about how taxes are spent. You're doing both. In every functioning nation, the rich subsidise the poor. I as an above average income earner am necessarily always going to subside the poor no matter where I live — unless it's a place that's got no government. That was true when I lived in the UK, true when I moved to Germany, and would have been true had I moved to the USA instead — all that changed for me was Joe Bloggs became Otto Normalverbraucher instead of Bubba Sixpack. > I don't care why or if you immigrate, but if you do Except you previously wrote "How about door 3: only allow immigration for skilled individuals capable of adding outsized value to our economy?" If you "allow" something but nobody wants to take you up on it, it's not any different than forbidding it. I'm allowing people to donate infinite money to me, but I'm not taking any steps to encourage this or give anyone a reason to. > People hiking across the Darién gap aren't magically going to become engineers and doctors Likewise a degree. In both cases the capability is already a demonstration of being well above average.
- pyrale 2y ago
  > "Hating migrants" != "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" As a foreigner, I honestly can't see the difference between "want only the migrants that pull their own weight" and "hate foreigners but refrain from saying it to their face if there's a financial incentive". If your tolerance is predicated on me giving you money, I'll pass the opportunity.
  - 15155 2y ago
    My tolerance is predicated on me not giving you money. Spend the money you earn on yourself: it will flow through the rest of the economy. But I am not going to give you any to do so.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      > My tolerance is predicated on me not giving you money. Either: 1) You also don't tolerate the below median earner who is native to your country or 2) Your tolerance is dependent on citizenship not just income If you're #1, that's a problem for your fellow citizens whom you don't tolerate. If you're #2, you're telling me to not bring my higher earning skills to your economy. Doesn't matter if you didn't mean it that way, you still won't get me spending the money I earn on your economy so you won't get rich from me.
      - 15155 2y ago
        Why can't it be both? Why can't I want to minimize the number of unskilled outsiders (with different values, etc.) because they may cost more while overlooking that fact for those with obvious economic power regardless of where they are from. I know it hurts to hear: people with wealth are desirable guests and citizens. A country's citizenry is much like children: some are going to be shitty, but we still support that limited group because of arbitrary moral obligation (perhaps inspired by the fact that we want our "own" to continue.) We're not obligated to extend this tradition to anyone else for any reason. > you still won't get me spending the money I earn on your economy so you won't get rich from me. Thankfully there are billions of people in the world and they're literally dying to get into the US. H-1Bs quotas are filled every year - there's no shortage of high-average earners wanting to come here, either.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
itsoktocry 2y ago
>why would I want to migrate to any country whose leaders were elected on a platform of hating migrants? Well, for one: cutting back on illegal immigrants and hating immigrants are not the same thing. Two: stay where you are? I don't get what your expectations are here. Plenty of skilled immigrants love the US. If it's not your cup of tea, that's fine.
- ben_w 2y ago
  1. Illegal immigration is already illegal. Cutting back on it is tangential to every other statement about promoting, limiting, or targeting migration. 2. I'm responding to a comment that says "How about door 3: only allow immigration for skilled individuals capable of adding outsized value to our economy?" And in my capacity as such a person: that attitude makes me not interested in anything else on the table. Hypothetically to demonstrate the point: You could offer me your entire GDP, even after accounting for a business plan where I somehow specifically help you double it, as pay… and I'd turn you down. Remember that the current state of immigration in the USA is exactly what was being proposed to be changed: the previous desirability is specifically not going to remain.

deniscepko2 2y ago

It works if your existing population is willing to do unskilled labour. Which in my country is not the case

arandomusername 2y ago
cheap labour, not unskilled. So what you want is to import third world immigrants so you can pay your plumber cheaply instead of paying them appriopriately.
- neeleshs 2y ago
  That's the ethos of commerce for thousands of years. Try to pay the least to get the best
15155 2y ago
I love this one because it's so basically obvious: the price for this work will increase or it simply won't happen and wasn't necessary anyway.
- astrange 2y ago
  You can't get native Americans to do farm work for any amount of money, because they'd have to live in the middle of nowhere near the farm and that's no fun. (That is, you'd have to pay them so much they could buy the farm and then hire someone else to work it. But you're not going to do that.)
  - 15155 2y ago
    The market will take care of this: people will do the work or pay for it or they won't eat.
    - astrange 2y ago
      "They won't eat" is a perfectly possible outcome of this, and a bad one. That is called a recession.

bryanlarsen 2y ago

Studies show you've got it backwards. If you let a nurse or programmer into the country, they're going to take a job that's otherwise filled by an American, depressing skilled wages. If you let in an unskilled laborer, they're going to take a job that nobody wants. They spend those wages, boosting the economy. In both cases, studies show that the number of jobs stays roughly the same; immigrants create about the same amount of jobs as they take. However skilled immigrants decrease average wages, and unskilled immigrants increase average wages. It's the outliers that really tip the balance, though. If one of those immigrants turns out to be Jensen Huang or his parents, that's how you make America great.

15155 2y ago
> Studies show you've got it backwards. If you let a nurse or programmer into the country, they're going to take a job that's otherwise filled by an American, depressing skilled wages. But at that same time they're contributing massive amounts to the tax base, furthering society. Maybe they even start a company, employing more programmers. They also spend their wages. > If you let in an unskilled laborer, they're going to take a job that nobody wants. The price for that work is artificially low because these folks don't have any legal protections of any kind. Guess what else happens commonly to unskilled, under-the-table labor? Injuries! Which I have to pay an outsized amount for in the form of Medicaid and ER fees. How much of their remaining income is remitted straight to their impoverished relatives back home? > If one of those immigrants turns out to be Jensen Huang or his parents Know how to easily filter out Jensen Huang from the crowd of people swimming across the Rio Grande? Marketable skills.
- bryanlarsen 2y ago
  > How much of their remaining income is remitted straight to their impoverished relatives back home? The skilled labourers do far more of that than unskilled ones. > Guess what else happens commonly to unskilled, under-the-table labor? Injuries! Which I have to pay an outsized amount for in the form of Medicaid and ER fees. The vast majority of the cost of health care is old people, and it's expensive because it's labor intensive. The way to bring health care costs down is to increase the ratio of young people to old people. Which in 2024 means immigration. > Know how to easily filter out Jensen Huang from the crowd of people swimming across the Rio Grande? Marketable skills. Marketable skills like shopkeeper? That's what Jensen Huang's parents were.