4 ms·

So basically you're proposing protectionist policies to limit supply and thus inflate the price of labor (that is, you). Would you also support similar argumen

So basically you're proposing protectionist policies to limit supply and thus inflate the price of labor (that is, you). Would you also support similar arguments for say, oh I don't know, taxi or hotel prices in the area where you live so the existing pool of taxi drivers or hotel owners can protect the income they are making?

shanusmagnus 12y ago
It may be useful for you to actually read TFA, which (spoiler alert) is not by me saying that we need to screw down the number of people we allow into the country, but is rather by another gentleman who has been stranded someplace unpleasant due to the ill winds of supply and demand, and wants to transform immigration policy until he washes up someplace more suited to his temperament.
chetanahuja 12y ago
Downvotes don't faze me but I find it telling that I don't see an actual reply to my point regarding protectionist policies. If you find yourself instinctively downvoting my comment, please also take a minute to form a coherent reply to it and post it. Why is it ok for the (American) hacker news crowd to demand a legally mandated supply shortage to keep the prices of their labor inflated while it's not ok for (usually much poorer) taxi drivers to demand the same (campaigning against Uber and such)?
- kamaal 12y ago
  You make a few valid points. But the issue is like always, every one feels their work is the most important occupation in the universe and every one else must just accommodate to whatever the conditions there are. Even more specifically if there really programmers out there who are best of the best. Making a lot of money would be least of their problems.
- shanusmagnus 12y ago
  I didn't downvote you, but maybe other people did because, as my original reply suggested, you're arguing against a position that nobody was taking. Nobody was talking about eliminating immigration, and not re-legislating immigration policy at the behest of MSFT and GOOG or Paul Graham cannot reasonably be translated as a 'mandated supply shortage.'
  - chetanahuja 12y ago
    "Nobody was talking about eliminating immigration," That's a strawman. Eliminating immigration is not the only way to restrict supply of software developers. "and not re-legislating immigration policy at the behest of..." The fact that you felt the need to add a couple of other "baddies" after "at the behest of" should be an indicator that the original argument is weak. This entire thread thread is filled with software engineers making the argument that increased supply of software engineers is going to decrease wages. That's exactly what happens in a free market of labor. As a thought experiment, imagine a world who got a job offer from a US company was free to move to the US and start working. Any situation short of that is a legally mandated labor supply shortage.
    - shanusmagnus 12y ago
      "Any situation short of that is a legally mandated labor supply shortage." Well duh. But again, that's not the point of TFA. You're clearly eager to advocate that laborers should be free to move about the world and work wherever they want. That's cool, knock yourself out. But it's another thread than this one.

shanusmagnus 12y ago

It may be useful for you to actually read TFA, which (spoiler alert) is not by me saying that we need to screw down the number of people we allow into the country, but is rather by another gentleman who has been stranded someplace unpleasant due to the ill winds of supply and demand, and wants to transform immigration policy until he washes up someplace more suited to his temperament.

chetanahuja 12y ago

Downvotes don't faze me but I find it telling that I don't see an actual reply to my point regarding protectionist policies. If you find yourself instinctively downvoting my comment, please also take a minute to form a coherent reply to it and post it. Why is it ok for the (American) hacker news crowd to demand a legally mandated supply shortage to keep the prices of their labor inflated while it's not ok for (usually much poorer) taxi drivers to demand the same (campaigning against Uber and such)?

kamaal 12y ago
You make a few valid points. But the issue is like always, every one feels their work is the most important occupation in the universe and every one else must just accommodate to whatever the conditions there are. Even more specifically if there really programmers out there who are best of the best. Making a lot of money would be least of their problems.
shanusmagnus 12y ago
I didn't downvote you, but maybe other people did because, as my original reply suggested, you're arguing against a position that nobody was taking. Nobody was talking about eliminating immigration, and not re-legislating immigration policy at the behest of MSFT and GOOG or Paul Graham cannot reasonably be translated as a 'mandated supply shortage.'
- chetanahuja 12y ago
  "Nobody was talking about eliminating immigration," That's a strawman. Eliminating immigration is not the only way to restrict supply of software developers. "and not re-legislating immigration policy at the behest of..." The fact that you felt the need to add a couple of other "baddies" after "at the behest of" should be an indicator that the original argument is weak. This entire thread thread is filled with software engineers making the argument that increased supply of software engineers is going to decrease wages. That's exactly what happens in a free market of labor. As a thought experiment, imagine a world who got a job offer from a US company was free to move to the US and start working. Any situation short of that is a legally mandated labor supply shortage.
  - shanusmagnus 12y ago
    "Any situation short of that is a legally mandated labor supply shortage." Well duh. But again, that's not the point of TFA. You're clearly eager to advocate that laborers should be free to move about the world and work wherever they want. That's cool, knock yourself out. But it's another thread than this one.