Dispelling a Myth Regarding Immigration

The myth is that immigration is bad for the West, when really it's essential for continued growth.

The demographic consensus is that native populations are on the decline in Europe, and will be relatively stable in the US over the next 50 years. That's without continued immigration, and before accounting for the 10 million+ illegal immigrants' offspring receiving citizenship. What this demographic crisis means is that, without immigration, we will have a under-supplied labor crisis. That's right, you shortsighted folk; high unemployment in the West is likely to be temporary. We're going to see the opposite issue as time goes by, and our populations age.

What's the solution to keep our economies growing? Immigration. It'd be better if we could choose who immigrates here, though. Take a look at the following list of immigrants by income, essentially a measure of how productive immigrants are from different countries in the USA:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

Based on the above, there are a couple conclusions:

1. We should be inviting the millions of Indians who want to come here into the country, all of them. They are the most productive of all immigrants based on the past, and there's no reason to expect that to change

2. Middle Eastern immigrants, namely Iranians, Lebanese, and Israelis, are among the most productive too. So when people say "don't let the Syrians in" I respond "why not?" This group has proven to be among the most productive citizens, despite what conservatives might think.

3. Finally, while Mexican immigrants aren't near the top of the list in productivity, they are an option too as they're so close. So the next time you hear Donald Trump supporters talk about building a wall, point out the impending demographic issue to them. I'm sure they won't listen, but it might be worth saying the obvious anyways to the few who do have open ears.

 

You don't see a difference between legal immigration and illegal immigration? One is where we know who is coming in and choose those who are a benefit to our nation, and the other means we don't have any idea who and what is coming across our borders.

So, are you saying illegal immigration good?

 

Yes. It's not ideal, illegal immigration, but any immigrant is a good immigrant. And btw, this is just anecdotal but I've noticed most Mexican illegals are very hard workers, for what it's worth. I would prefer to see millions of Indians be admitted to the country, as they are extremely productive, but illegals are okay too.

 

How do you determine which groups are the most productive? For example how could you say that Indians are more productive than say Sri Lankans or Cambodians?

 

Personally I'm a believer that income is a good measure of productivity. I know liberals will disagree with this, but I believe it's largely true (with many exceptions); the higher your income, the harder you generally work. I repeat that there are many exceptions, millions actually, but on average higher income means harder working.

 

So you wish to open all borders? That has had disastrous consequences in the past wherever it has happened.

 

I'd also note that immigration might be the only solution we have to a potential impending social security crisis (I'm sure you're aware of what I'm talking about). We can't pay off social security for our aging population barring a miracle. That "miracle" would be millions of young, productive immigrants paying into the system. You want your social security? Well, then you want immigration.

- - - Updated - - -

I think you're alluding to Rome, maybe some other countries that became decadent after masses of immigrants came in.

The situation is entirely different. Rome didn't face an aging population; no country in history has experienced what the West (and Japan) is currently experiencing. And new situations change the ball game completely.

 

So you are for open borders? Letting in the cartel, the criminals and the poor who know we have welfare benefits...?

Would you allow strangers in your house with your family to do repairs unasked? To come in at will? That would be a dangerous thing right? I'm sure you have locks on your door. Why are you so set on putting other Americans in danger by advocating people pour across the border.

 

Yes, I'm for letting the cartels and criminals in (sarcasm). No, you're clearly putting words in my mouth. It's called pragmatism; the illegals WILL continue to come in over the years. They just will, barring a 30billion/yr wall that we'd have to build to keep them out. Americans have generally always been xenophobic; it was once the Irish, then Italians, then X and then Y. That's okay; it's just our nature to be xenophobic. But we look at the past and see that nearly every group that immigrated en masse to the US had assimilated and prospered within 2-3 generations of coming.

So no, illegal immigration isn't ideal, but it's happening and it's going to continue to happen. I think you should focus more on what is, rather than an ideal world that isn't.

 

you are just as wrong as the anti immigrant crowd. true the west and tight now primarily europe needs immigrants but the flip side is they bring in everything from lice to TB to female circumcision to the mafia which we spend the next couple generations overcoming.

 

I'm getting irritated with you acting like illegal immigration and immigration is the same thing. Its not. And its dishonest to say Trump, me or any American wants no immigration. Most do.

 

1. See my prior post (number 10 I think) - focus on dealing with something that's likely inevitable.

2. I think we absolutely should be admitting more legal immigrants. It's ridiculous that we have the option to take the best and brightest from India, China etc. and bring them here, and we don't let them in. Notably India; they're clamoring to get here, they've proven they can be very beneficial to our country, and we only let them come in small numbers. It's a ridiculous policy.

 

By assuming that Americans are Xenophobic you are working on a false premise. That is like me calling you Xenophobic because you might have locks on your door so that you can control who comes into your house. Its also false to assume we can't control our borders. We did so successfully in the 40's and 50's...as we acclaimated the immigrants we already had into American culture.

 

We agree to disagree then. I have seen no evidence that we can realistically close the borders, beyond a 30 billion a year (30 billion!) that would then eliminate the effects of stopping illegal immigration.

edit: Oh yeah and we are xenophobic. I'm not using the "bigot" card, I have no problem with our xenophobia, it's a pretty natural sentiment. But it's wrong given our future demographic situation.

 

Personally I'm for less red-tape and less expensive immigration from Mexico--where you don't have to be rich to be approved. But we can still be choosy. Mexico shares many of our Christian/Judaic values and they do value hard work. Its fine to get workers who want to stay Mexican citizens but work to send money home. But they have to obey our laws or they are out. And the ones that come across to be American Citizens have to be loyal to America and they should have the same ability as native born Americans to get ahead---which means learning the language. We don't want these people come across the border to end up being in a stagnant low class situation---they need to advance.

 

Good post, absolutely agreed. I have a big problem with our legal immigration policies (as discussed, we're way too strict about admission from some countries), a small problem with illegal immigration (the concerns you expressed), but ultimately I don't see illegal immigration stopping.

Do you really think we're going to stop illegal immigration?

- - - Updated - - -

OK, so let's hypothetically say you're right about the danger of the immigrants coming into Europe from, say, Syria. Let's say we want to keep them out. That costs money, lots of it. Where do we get this surplus money to keep them out?

There's an obvious answer; let millions of legal immigrants in, who we get to select, and then tax them. Using the taxes, pay for the security/wall/border patrol or whatever it is you want to do to keep the illegals out, and viola! Problem solved.

 

That's a myth that "Mexican illegals are very hard worker."

The reason they seem to be hard workers is because they do things the hard way.

It takes five Mexicans to be able to be as productive as three Americans.

Also Mexicans are twice as likely to be injured on the job as an American doing exactly the same job.

 

One more thing. To highlight how bad this looming demographic crisis is in the West, look to Japan in the present.

Japan is in trouble. They face an aging population, rising debt, and dramatically slowed growth. Many people are aware that it's only a matter of time till the country faces collapse due to these three factors. In fact, a common tactic being used to capitalize on this coming disaster is to short Japanese government treasuries (if the government collapses and is unable to pay its debts, being short Japanese treasuries is very good). Japan is aware of the problem, and they will have to take radical measures to stop the demographic tide hitting them. Moreover, they're extremely xenophobic there and refuse to see that immigration as a potential answer to the aging demographic problem.

--> This is what the US and Europe will face in ~20-30 years barring mass immigration to keep the population young and productive. My advice to you is keep an eye on Japan over the next decade and see how it unfolds; because it's a good test zone for what the West faces.

 

Legal immigration can certainly be a benefit during times of wage inflation, but we are certainly not suffering from wage inflation today, on the contrary, we are suffering from flat and declining wages. But at a different part of economic cycle, you make a very good point.

As for illegal immigration, it should never be rewarded or tolerated.

 

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said his department is actively “tracking” individuals who have re-entered the U.S. after fighting alongside ISIS and other terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria.

Why do we allow ISIS fighters loose in the US?

The moderator, Andrea Mitchell of NBC News, asked Johnson how the government plans to screen the large number of Syrian refugees attempting to come to the U.S.

“It is a time-consuming process to conduct the security review for each refugee and we have finite resources to do it, which requires people from USCIS to conduct the interviews and people from the State Department,” he said.

No chance they won't screw that up.

http://pjmedia.com/blog/dhs-tracking-foreign-fighters-in-u-s-affiliated-with-terrorist-groups/2/

 

you also need to teach them the local culture or else you are doing stuff like picking up dead goats from along the highway from animal sacrifices by Haitians like they do in Miami.

 

Have you ever considered that the reason native populations aren't having as many children is because it's not economical because there is high unemployment? The immigrants are displacing our future workers as well as our present ones.

 

To be fair, Immigration does have its benefits.

 

one small example is drywall in construction. you end up with something more like adobe.

 

We already have the ability to bring in as many "Mexican" as we need via the H2A (there is no cap limit to the amount of that visa that can be issued). The issue being the burdensome of obtaining the visa via our AG industry. If we simply changed that visa to be like any other non-immigrant work visa then the amount of illegal immigrants we would have coming in would severely decrease.

Your "gotcha' question didn't "gotcha" anybody.