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

Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

cato.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#91

Post by jmpman »

JackFr wrote: post #33
jerkstate wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really - this is just more Koch free-trade “libertarianism” where the costs are socialized and benefits accrue to only the wealthiest capitalists. Par for the course for Cato.

The benefits don’t accrue to the capitalists they accrue to consumers. Capitalists don’t get rich stealing from workers. The get rich improving the lives of consumers.

The alternative to immigrant minimum wage strawberry pickers is native born strawberry pickers who would demand significantly higher wages. The capitalists get rich by selling more strawberries at a lower price. It can be both bad for native born strawberry pickers as well as good for consumers. But there are few native born strawberry pickers who have a political voice. Substitute strawberry pickers with software developers, and now you’re talking about the native born HN crowd.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#92

Post by zerr »

milesrout wrote: post #89
zerr wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context of the current sub-thread is an economic development and wages. So yes, vibrant cities contribute positively to this. As for keeping "cozy" places, that's not a zero-sum game. We can have both.

"Vibrant" is a euphemism. The economic effects of unrestricted mass immigration of unskilled people from third world countries cannot be divorced and analysed separately from the social and cultural effects. You need only look at any of the places in the US that have already been subject to these waves of illegal invasion, or the various places in Europe that have been flooded with unwanted illegal aliens falsely cla…

You are talking only about extremes. There is a huge uncovered middle-ground. As for "illegal" immigration, it will always be the case when legal immigration is nearly impossible.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#93

Post by afiori »

legitster wrote: post #27
pton_xd wrote: post #4

Conclusion: "The administration should loosen all the restrictions that it has imposed above and beyond what Congress has required, and Congress should overhaul the system to open legal immigration for any person willing to work to contribute to the success of the United States." In other words, we should "promptly admit a majority of the 158 million who told Gallup that they would want to come," according to the 201…

We don't ask of every baby that is being born in the US how they will make the country better. But if given the option to bring in a fully grown adult, who already saves us the cost of an education, is of prime working age, and wants to be in this country, we suddenly care?

we don't "allow" people being born because peoples have a right to be born, it is rather that people have a right to have children.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#94

Post by toomuchtodo »

dyauspitr wrote: post #76
toomuchtodo wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When every US citizen who wants a job in the US has one, one they can live off of with a living wage, sure, it’s up for a conversation (when legitimate labor shortages exist vs faux shortages leveraged as labor cost controls). Why am I going to support immigration that drives down wages for capital returns? Because it makes “the country” more wealthy by making a select few wealthier? Ineffective policy imho. I am nev…

Most unicorns in the US have immigrants founders. It’s extremely shortsighted to think the way you’re thinking. The immigrants are in essence the ones providing jobs for a lot of us.

Who reaps most of the gains from US unicorns? Founders and early VC investors. This is not a material economic cohort to optimize for, versus workers in the aggregate; visa paths for exceptional talent are still available.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#95

Post by toomuchtodo »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #75
toomuchtodo wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By that logic we should restrict the number of children being born. I disagree with this assertion. Controlling immigration is reasonable and proper when a nation state has boundaries, citizens vs non citizens, and an economic system to balance. Forcing people who want children to not have children is neither reasonable nor proper. With that said, we are in luck: the fertility rate is rapidly declining in almost ev…

Interesting how legitster's reductio ad absurdum argument got missed here. They're using the birth rate comparison not to actually advocate for birth restrictions, but to expose a flaw in the original economic reasoning. Legitser is pointing out that every person you add to the population is not just a supplier, but also a customer. They create demand for goods and services even as they help produce them. This makes…

Why do you focus on number of jobs vs poor economic outcomes current state across the economy for your median worker? Why do we care if immigration creates jobs from consumption if the jobs created (from said immigration) are going to be low quality, economically unfavorable (to the worker) jobs?

“Think of the jobs!” arguments in this thread are optimizing for economic activity. I am arguing for workers to have better lives through better jobs, not more jobs. To understand this is to also better understand the shift to far right populism in the developed world as it relates to economic insecurity.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#96

Post by afpx »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #15
pton_xd wrote: post #4

Conclusion: "The administration should loosen all the restrictions that it has imposed above and beyond what Congress has required, and Congress should overhaul the system to open legal immigration for any person willing to work to contribute to the success of the United States." In other words, we should "promptly admit a majority of the 158 million who told Gallup that they would want to come," according to the 201…

All immigration is GDP additive and increases the market for goods and tax income for governments. It offsets low birth rates. If there is a labor shortage it will reduce inflation. Of course there many considerations but generally it's a good thing.

Given the great benefits, I wonder why there is no country on Earth that has open immigration.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#97

Post by Kim_Bruning »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #95
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting how legitster's reductio ad absurdum argument got missed here. They're using the birth rate comparison not to actually advocate for birth restrictions, but to expose a flaw in the original economic reasoning. Legitser is pointing out that every person you add to the population is not just a supplier, but also a customer. They create demand for goods and services even as they help produce them. This makes…

Why do you focus on number of jobs vs poor economic outcomes current state across the economy for your median worker? Why do we care if immigration creates jobs from consumption if the jobs created (from said immigration) are going to be low quality, economically unfavorable (to the worker) jobs? “Think of the jobs!” arguments in this thread are optimizing for economic activity. I am arguing for workers to have bette…

I actually completely agree with you that people should have good and interesting jobs. I could use a lot of words, but... I just completely agree on that part.

Now how this ends up in an immigration debate has me slightly mystified, I do have to admit.

I'm treating the "if immigration creates [...] low quality [...] jobs" as one of a set of hypotheticals. Some others being that immigration creates high quality jobs, or indifferent jobs.

So it seems we're in at least partial agreement (hopefully).

Where would you like to take your argument from here?

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#98

Post by toomuchtodo »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #97
toomuchtodo wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you focus on number of jobs vs poor economic outcomes current state across the economy for your median worker? Why do we care if immigration creates jobs from consumption if the jobs created (from said immigration) are going to be low quality, economically unfavorable (to the worker) jobs? “Think of the jobs!” arguments in this thread are optimizing for economic activity. I am arguing for workers to have bette…

I actually completely agree with you that people should have good and interesting jobs. I could use a lot of words, but... I just completely agree on that part. Now how this ends up in an immigration debate has me slightly mystified, I do have to admit. I'm treating the "if immigration creates [...] low quality [...] jobs" as one of a set of hypotheticals. Some others being that immigration creates high quality jobs,…

I think we might just disagree what an immigration system looks like where immigrants compliment vs compete with the domestic workforce. I support immigration when it adds to an economic system, but not when it furthers contention or diminishes the economics of citizens.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#99

Post by Kim_Bruning »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #98
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually completely agree with you that people should have good and interesting jobs. I could use a lot of words, but... I just completely agree on that part. Now how this ends up in an immigration debate has me slightly mystified, I do have to admit. I'm treating the "if immigration creates [...] low quality [...] jobs" as one of a set of hypotheticals. Some others being that immigration creates high quality jobs,…

I think we might just disagree what an immigration system looks like where immigrants compliment vs compete with the domestic workforce. I support immigration when it adds to an economic system, but not when it furthers contention or diminishes the economics of citizens.

You know, I just realized. I'm not sure this is the argument you're making, but:

Modern immigration systems in Europe and North America seem to aim for opposite ends of the spectrum - either attracting highly skilled professionals, or providing humanitarian support for those in dire need. But for middle class workers, regular movement in and out of these economic zones [1] remains surprisingly limited. That's exactly the group you'd expect to both create and fill good quality jobs.

[1] (With the notable exception of movement within the EU internally, which might actually support this point - middle class mobility there seems to work pretty well!)

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#100

Post by financetechbro »

jalapenos wrote: post #22
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All immigration is GDP additive and increases the market for goods and tax income for governments. It offsets low birth rates. If there is a labor shortage it will reduce inflation. Of course there many considerations but generally it's a good thing.

It's a good thing for those classes of people you just mentioned (governments, business owners). For everyone else it's just increased competition.

Competition in the context of capitalism is considered a feature and not a bug
Post reply on HN