I think you misinterpreted my below birth rate part, I think we do need immigration to help address that.
We just also need to help make it more viable to raise a family here.
Then what’s the difference between your proposed solution and the exact problem you pointed out in it (ie that it becomes a ‘drum to beat’ as standards change)?
Setting one standard forever doesn’t match the ebbs and flows of our society as you said, but things are incredibly tough right now. I don’t know the right answer here, but right now we need to address our critical issues and we aren’t ready for more immigration at the moment. If we got back to say 30% of spending being on housing on average the situation suddenly makes a lot more sense to take in immigrants.
But one target like that isn’t enough,so we need so e sort of targets that we can infrequently update.
I think you misinterpreted my below birth rate part, I think we do need immigration to help address that.
We just also need to help make it more viable to raise a family here.
But how will restricting immigration make it more viable to raise a family? How is restricting immigration, then, anything but self-defeating by your own identification of the ongoing problems?
I don’t know the right answer here, but right now we need to address our critical issues and we aren’t ready for more immigration at the moment. If we got back to say 30% of spending being on housing on average the situation suddenly makes a lot more sense to take in immigrants.
But again, this is all operating under the presumption that immigration worsens or somehow prevents the resolution of these issues, which is contrary to the actual causes of the situation by any serious analysis. Immigrants are not going to increase or decrease average spending on housing; the issue of housing and rent prices is almost completely divorced from supply-relative-to-population; this is an ongoing issue in Western societies that has been widely recognized in economics academia since the 1990s.
Marxist, Keynesian, Chicago School, and Austrian Cult economics are all in agreement on the issue of immigration wrt prices and wages. Your proposal that immigration needs to be restricted in order to restore economic equilibrium and provide a decent standard of living is just not an idea that is taken seriously by any economics analysis; it’s a purely knee-jerk reaction that belongs solely in the political realm of preying on prejudices and preconceptions to call for easy-but-actually-counterproductive ‘solutions’, like tariffs ‘restoring jobs’ to a country.
Thats probably because your opinions are pretty laughable. I really am sorry (not really, you’re just parroting long debunked nonsense) but there it is.
Immigration is pretty much never the problem. Its always the capital class abusing standards of care to enrich themselves.
Its way easier/cheaper to abuse someone on a visa who is desperate to not go back than it is to compete for employees in a labor market that isnt coercive.
Which in turn puts downward pressure on nonimmigrants wages. If you remove the coercive elements of the systemic effects on immigrants the problem would resolve itself to everyone but the capital class’ benefit.
Jobs would be filled at wages that allow for those individuals to go and buy things which in turn increases demand creating more jobs.
The only bit you need to take care with is the rate so you dont oversaturate an area.
That fact is you dont understand dynamic systems and you just quote idiotic takes from morons like musk who benefit from being able to exploit these people at your own detriment.
If you want to see a positive change grant citizenship to any undocumentedee immigrants who reports their employer for employing them, and remove company sponsorship of visas allowing them to freely change jobs.
You’ll see a dramatic shift in employment patterns.
This is literally the same reason the US doesnt have decent healthcare. Its a coercive process that forces sick people and their family to work and exploited by corporations. Everytime you hear ‘we need to put work requirements on x’ you can pretty much replace it with ‘i cant exploit these people as much as id like’
I think you misinterpreted my below birth rate part, I think we do need immigration to help address that.
We just also need to help make it more viable to raise a family here.
Setting one standard forever doesn’t match the ebbs and flows of our society as you said, but things are incredibly tough right now. I don’t know the right answer here, but right now we need to address our critical issues and we aren’t ready for more immigration at the moment. If we got back to say 30% of spending being on housing on average the situation suddenly makes a lot more sense to take in immigrants.
But one target like that isn’t enough,so we need so e sort of targets that we can infrequently update.
(PS: I do enjoy your pushing me on my opinions)
But how will restricting immigration make it more viable to raise a family? How is restricting immigration, then, anything but self-defeating by your own identification of the ongoing problems?
But again, this is all operating under the presumption that immigration worsens or somehow prevents the resolution of these issues, which is contrary to the actual causes of the situation by any serious analysis. Immigrants are not going to increase or decrease average spending on housing; the issue of housing and rent prices is almost completely divorced from supply-relative-to-population; this is an ongoing issue in Western societies that has been widely recognized in economics academia since the 1990s.
Marxist, Keynesian, Chicago School, and Austrian Cult economics are all in agreement on the issue of immigration wrt prices and wages. Your proposal that immigration needs to be restricted in order to restore economic equilibrium and provide a decent standard of living is just not an idea that is taken seriously by any economics analysis; it’s a purely knee-jerk reaction that belongs solely in the political realm of preying on prejudices and preconceptions to call for easy-but-actually-counterproductive ‘solutions’, like tariffs ‘restoring jobs’ to a country.
Thats probably because your opinions are pretty laughable. I really am sorry (not really, you’re just parroting long debunked nonsense) but there it is.
Immigration is pretty much never the problem. Its always the capital class abusing standards of care to enrich themselves.
Its way easier/cheaper to abuse someone on a visa who is desperate to not go back than it is to compete for employees in a labor market that isnt coercive.
Which in turn puts downward pressure on nonimmigrants wages. If you remove the coercive elements of the systemic effects on immigrants the problem would resolve itself to everyone but the capital class’ benefit.
Jobs would be filled at wages that allow for those individuals to go and buy things which in turn increases demand creating more jobs.
The only bit you need to take care with is the rate so you dont oversaturate an area.
That fact is you dont understand dynamic systems and you just quote idiotic takes from morons like musk who benefit from being able to exploit these people at your own detriment.
If you want to see a positive change grant citizenship to any undocumentedee immigrants who reports their employer for employing them, and remove company sponsorship of visas allowing them to freely change jobs.
You’ll see a dramatic shift in employment patterns.
This is literally the same reason the US doesnt have decent healthcare. Its a coercive process that forces sick people and their family to work and exploited by corporations. Everytime you hear ‘we need to put work requirements on x’ you can pretty much replace it with ‘i cant exploit these people as much as id like’