Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A world of free movement would be $78T richer

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 402 posts

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#261

Post by dang »

qaq wrote: post #255
troubador55 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"but pretty much any other country is trivial often with immediately being permanent resident or some visa that converts to PR in 1-2 years." Not at all. I know a couple that tried to move to Canada after Trump got elected but were shocked to find out they'd have to deposit 250k USD with the Canadian government for 5 years in order to be considered for permanantly residency. Not only that, the demand for people to m…

If they get enough points (which is trivial) you get PR even without job offer. edited: strong lang.

Would you please edit the uncivil snips like "BS" and "You've got to be kidding" out of your comments here? We're trying for a bit better than internet median, and taking little shots like that lowers the discussion quality and encourages worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#262

Post by qaq »

troubador55 wrote: post #248
qaq wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) legal? 2) Historical laws vs current laws 3) Adjust for population size Even for say Software Eng. moving to US is a very f@#$up process, but pretty much any other country is trivial often with immediately being permanent resident or some visa that converts to PR in 1-2 years.

>"but pretty much any other country is trivial often with immediately being permanent resident or some visa that converts to PR in 1-2 years." Not at all. I know a couple that tried to move to Canada after Trump got elected but were shocked to find out they'd have to deposit 250k USD with the Canadian government for 5 years in order to be considered for permanantly residency. Not only that, the demand for people to m…

If they are from US and for some very strange reason can not get enough points to pass the simplest route is 1 person from the couple goes to college in Canada (even the cheapest one) the second person can get work permit based on being spouse of a student (student can work half time too) With 1 year of work experience and a Canadian degree they will have enough points for PR.

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#263

Post by qaq »

dang wrote: post #261
qaq wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they get enough points (which is trivial) you get PR even without job offer. edited: strong lang.

Would you please edit the uncivil snips like "BS" and "You've got to be kidding" out of your comments here? We're trying for a bit better than internet median, and taking little shots like that lowers the discussion quality and encourages worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Done sorry for anyone that had a pleasure of going through US immigration system the notion that it is "friendly" will steer up a lot of strong feelings.

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#264

Post by robryan »

fwn wrote: post #57
branchless wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Add 10% to the economy, let's imagine for once it's passed onto wages, also up 10%. Rents up 10%. Everyone working longer for the landlords. Gains go to land under the current system. We already added women to the workforce more, rents went up.

The proposition that all gains in productivity are absorbed by rental charges sounds completely off to me. How would that even work? Just imagine: If housing were that great of an investment, everyone would get enough credit to build, making effectively everyone a landlord.

It depends how tight the rental market is, if there is a lot more demand than supply it is possible that the full increase would be absorbed in rental increases.

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#265

Post by troubador55 »

qaq wrote: post #263
dang wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you please edit the uncivil snips like "BS" and "You've got to be kidding" out of your comments here? We're trying for a bit better than internet median, and taking little shots like that lowers the discussion quality and encourages worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Done sorry for anyone that had a pleasure of going through US immigration system the notion that it is "friendly" will steer up a lot of strong feelings.

But it is difficult because demand is so tremendous and there are reasonable quotas. Not because it's difficult for difficulties sake.

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#266

Post by briandear »

remarkEon wrote: post #188

>If the worry is that immigrants will outvote the locals and impose an uncongenial government on them, one solution would be not to let immigrants vote—for five years, ten years or even a lifetime. This is actually an interesting idea worth thinking about more. If the concern for those on the right is that more immigrants to the US would cause a permanent electoral Blue Wall by flipping Texas in a couple election cyc…

If you take voting off the table, Democrats won’t be seen as quite so humanitarian and Republicans won’t be seen as against unskilled immigration.

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#267

Post by briandear »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #227
remarkEon wrote: post #188

>If the worry is that immigrants will outvote the locals and impose an uncongenial government on them, one solution would be not to let immigrants vote—for five years, ten years or even a lifetime. This is actually an interesting idea worth thinking about more. If the concern for those on the right is that more immigrants to the US would cause a permanent electoral Blue Wall by flipping Texas in a couple election cyc…

I love this idea. I think it should be applied to all jurisdictions in the US. If I move to another town or state my vote should count as 1/X increasing by 1/X per year until it's 1/1. I shouldn't have the opportunity to vote at a full 1/1 until I've assimilated to that locale. If I'm moving somewhere I presumably like the status quo there so much that I shouldn't have much need to change things.

Assuming my taxes are applied at an equal percentage. I pay thousands to the state of California and I just moved here. I have a right to my vote if the state has a right to my tax dollars.

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#268

Post by briandear »

onetimemanytime wrote: post #65
oldcynic wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried getting adequate and affordable child care? Fortunately our kids don't need it any more. It hugely restricts available options. Either from hours available, lengthy waiting lists or simply finding that after paying childcare work is no longer making economic sense.

>>Have you tried getting adequate and affordable child care? Nigerian or Mexican immigrants doing that in USA would face the same high rent and expenses as US workers. They might charge a little less and that's it.

That is exactly it. The fixed costs are identical.

Re: A world of free movement would be $78T richer

#270

Post by qaq »

troubador55 wrote: post #265
qaq wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Done sorry for anyone that had a pleasure of going through US immigration system the notion that it is "friendly" will steer up a lot of strong feelings.

But it is difficult because demand is so tremendous and there are reasonable quotas. Not because it's difficult for difficulties sake.

Here's what is happening large companies tired of dealing with this system have setup offices in Ireland, Canada etc. When they want to hire people from outside US they move them to Ireland, Canada etc. and than will either keep them there or move them to US on H1B (if they win the lot.) or GC (takes 2 years+). So outside of loosing 2 years of tax revenue (or all future years of tax revenue based on them staying in satelite office I am honestly confused of what is exactly the benefit to US.
Post reply on HN