Thread: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

  1. #3861

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    White liberalism at its finest.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 








    Let's see who's the smart one who gets what's going on here?

  2. #3862

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidin View Post
    "Unskilled immigrant labor" is a much longer term investment than people seem to think. Return on investment is more on second generation being skilled labor or educated labor and being at least in the upper five figures in salary if not six figures. And well, skilled labor these days can make a killing. If you have a good reputation as being trusted for the big town/small cities plumber, carpenter, HVAC, auto repair...you're easily in the six figures. Especially with the modern engineering products you're learning to install and the solutions you have to come up with for modern housing and vehicles.

    Wanting immigrants to immediately be skilled or educated is a bit like wanting a college graduate with a bachelor's degree to have 5 years of experience(many cities went through this stage about 15 years ago). I mean, yes, we have the EB-X visas, but...when you're just taking in immigrants, you're not really expecting them to be sponsored for their professional knowledge.
    this is false, atleast in sweden. second generation is still a net drain. doesnt even look like 3rd generation will make it worthwhile. and if you have to wait that long anyways its clearly not working. Its a myth that this kind of immigration is beneficial. its an act of charity.

  3. #3863
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    8,764
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Wanting immigrants to immediately be skilled or educated is a bit like wanting a college graduate with a bachelor's degree to have 5 years of experience
    B-but the TV told me immigrants were engineers and doctors.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

  4. #3864

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    The liberal elite and middle classes only profit from "influxes of unskilled labor" if that labor can actually integrate into the workforce. The Swedes accepted tens of thousands of refugees many of whom aren't even literate in their native languages, let alone Swedish. When you combine this with the cultural conflicts caused by the fusion of disparate societies and Sweden's generous welfare state the problems start becoming obvious.
    So no? No economic measure to go off of here, I just gotta take your word for it that the economy is being harmed?

    Quote Originally Posted by NosPortatArma View Post
    The complication is our generous welfare. Any immigrant who comes here and works increases gdp, that's true, but it's not enough. They must be productive enough, so that they on average pay more than they recieve in welfare. Since we are so generous, they need to be very productive in order to be a net contributor. So yes, technically immigration has boosted our economy in the sense of increasing absolute gdp, but it is killing our public finances. Generous welfare simply is not compatible with unskilled immigration. for most immigrant groups, their productivity is consistently lower than what it needs to be to break even. What happens with the kind of immigration we have, is essentially a net wealth transfer from the natives to the immigrants. in that sense, it's of course not an economic benefit.
    Again, do you have any metric or study I can look at here? These are all arguments I have heard Americans make about immigrant labor here, but that wasn't true at all. I have had people who will look me dead in the face and tell me unemployment for citizens is skyrocketing because immigrants are taking all the jobs (these are people with no economics education, mind you) and I glance over at the stats and see that isn't true.

    I am not saying you are wrong here, I can imagine a welfare system being overburdened and I am not familiar with the economic specifics of Sweden, but I would like to see something more concrete than economic takes by laymen. If someone doesn't know much about economics, immigrants taking jobs and causing unemployment for natives makes sense on the surface level if they think jobs are a finite resource. Of course, that isn't how it played out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    B-but the TV told me immigrants were engineers and doctors.
    Don't know about you guys, but the US has a long history of high skill immigrant labor. Or did you think Einstein, Tesla, and Asimov were all born in the US?
    Last edited by The spartan; July 21, 2019 at 03:51 PM.
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

  5. #3865

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    I would like to see something more concrete than economic takes by laymen.
    of course. tino sanandaji has a lecture with english subs. search youtube "tino sanandaji facts on immigration".
    https://youtu.be/JMt8zkSP9xE

    and here is english summary of a rapport by economist joakim ruist, who concludes that "refugee immigrarion has a negative fiscal impact, both short and long term". see last paragraph.
    https://eso.expertgrupp.se/wp-conten...11/Summary.pdf

  6. #3866

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Thanks, it will take me a little bit to go through it especially since I can't just have it playing in the background; gotta read them subtitles.
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

  7. #3867

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by NosPortatArma View Post
    which depends on the kind of immigrant and also the economy he enters. thus turns out they are a drain most of the time
    It also depends on what their long-term effect on the economy is, and whether it exceeds the political and financial cost of willingly denying people entry on the grounds of economic harm. There is a reason why nobody practices free trade, and it's not because the economic don't support it.

  8. #3868

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Don't know about you guys, but the US has a long history of high skill immigrant labor. Or did you think Einstein, Tesla, and Asimov were all born in the US?
    Not just high skill labour. The railways that linked America and enabled them to become a powerhouse where built by cheap, immigrant labour.

  9. #3869

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Thanks, it will take me a little bit to go through it especially since I can't just have it playing in the background; gotta read them subtitles.
    you are welcome. I just remembered that Dave Rubin has an interview with Sanandaji, in english of course. I dont remember exactly what they talk about, but probably immigration. check it out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    It also depends on what their long-term effect on the economy is, and whether it exceeds the political and financial cost of willingly denying people entry on the grounds of economic harm. There is a reason why nobody practices free trade, and it's not because the economic don't support it.
    what do you mean? low skill immigratio to welfare states is a drain both short and long term. there is no economic rationale for it, as ruist describes: see my previous post, 2nd link.

  10. #3870

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by NosPortatArma View Post
    you are welcome. I just remembered that Dave Rubin has an interview with Sanandaji, in english of course. I dont remember exactly what they talk about, but probably immigration. check it out.
    I don't watch Dave Rubin because his entire show contributes nothing to any rational discussion.

    what do you mean? low skill immigratio to welfare states is a drain both short and long term. there is no economic rationale for it, as ruist describes: see my previous post, 2nd link.
    I did read and watch both sources.

    1. It's not really an economic crisis.
    2. Unemployment and Inequality is due to increase in immigration because the people who suffer most from those things are the immigrants themselves.
    3. You're really not reading the literature very carefully.

    For example,

    "Young adults (25-35 years old), who arrived in Sweden as
    refugees or their family members when they were children, have on
    average lower employment rates than similarly-aged natives. The
    differences are small for those who arrived in Sweden at below 15
    years of age, and larger for those who were 16-19."

    Next, when it talks about net fiscal impact...

    "Numerical estimates are
    highly uncertain, but indicate that the net fiscal transfer to the
    average refugee, over their entire lifetime in Sweden amounts to, on
    average, 74,000 kronor per year. By comparison, the net transfer to
    the average refugee in Sweden in 2015 was 60,000 kronor."

    So is the final number 60,000-74,000 before retirement age? Is that 60,000 per year and 74,000 as a total sum over the lifetime of a worker?

    What about children of immigrants? What about 3rd generation immigrants? As an American study noted before, while first-generation immigrants are a net drain on US resources, second-generation, i.e. the kids, are among the strongest contributors.

    I mean it is entertaining to handwave all of this as if it was a simple topic, but "simple book-keeping" really isn't that simple. I suggest we gain a much more thorough appreciation for accounting than the first source gives us. Now I enjoyed the video so thank you.

  11. #3871

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    So no? No economic measure to go off of here, I just gotta take your word for it that the economy is being harmed?
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    I didn't claim that the economy would be "harmed". My point was that the impact of migrant policy is dependent on the context. If the state is spending a staggering 1.35% of the country's GDP in a single year on supporting part of its migrant population then its probably making a bad investment if its objectives are purely (or even largely) economic. In the Anglo-French world, the mass migrant economy is financially lucrative (for the bourgeoisie and aristocracy) because it follows a profiteering rather than a humanitarian model.
    Last edited by Cope; July 22, 2019 at 02:33 AM.



  12. #3872

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    It's not really an economic crisis.
    its not the imediete collapse of sweden no. but its an economic loss, thats reason enough.

    Unemployment and Inequality is due to increase in immigration because the people who suffer most from those things are the immigrants themselves.
    i know that. i havent claimed immigrants take our jobs. they are so unskilled that tey just end up living on welfarw, which we pay for. its just another drain, hence we should stop it.

    Young adults (25-35 years old), who arrived in Sweden as
    refugees or their family members when they were children, have on
    average lower employment rates than similarly-aged natives. The
    differences are small for those who arrived in Sweden at below 15
    years of age, and larger for those who were 16-19."
    and this supposedly disproves what?

    So is the final number 60,000-74,000 before retirement age? Is that 60,000 per year and 74,000 as a total sum over the lifetime of a worker?
    it means that for every refugee we accept, we are throwing away 74k, taking into accout all we will give them, and all they will give us.

    What about children of immigrants? What about 3rd generation immigrants?
    are you sure you watched tinos presentation? i think he hade a slide showing how not even 2nd generation immigrants (differs by group of course) reach the producrivity of natives.

  13. #3873

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    But libs told me that problems would disappear after the second generation like it happened in America. Why are liberals lying?

  14. #3874

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by NosPortatArma View Post
    its not the imediete collapse of sweden no. but its an economic loss, thats reason enough.
    Sure, and that's an argument one can make. I don't deny it, it's a good argument. But considering Scandinavia's history of humanitarianism, and their insistence on accepting so many immigrants and refugees, I don't see it as much of a problem. Especially when the economics are not fully set in stone from the information given so far. Is the quest for transparency good? Sure, I think everyone can get behind publishing of all information and statistics, even those that hurt the immigrant cause.

    i know that. i havent claimed immigrants take our jobs. they are so unskilled that tey just end up living on welfarw, which we pay for. its just another drain, hence we should stop it.
    Certainly not all of them, and as your own sources show, they stop being a drain eventually even if they don't fully recoup their costs.

    and this supposedly disproves what?
    That the economic data is vague. We do not receive economic measurements for the children, which is understandable, considering the long time horizon, and I also do not see what happens to second-generation immigrants. Also understandable, since that expands the time horizon.

    it means that for every refugee we accept, we are throwing away 74k, taking into accout all we will give them, and all they will give us.
    Ok, got it.

    are you sure you watched tinos presentation? i think he hade a slide showing how not even 2nd generation immigrants (differs by group of course) reach the producrivity of natives.
    Yes, and I don't remember him talking about second generation immigrants. I could have of course forgotten, I don't remember everything form those two hours, I only watched a couple times, but the only time I remember him talking about children was in reference to education. I remember productivity numbers, and good points were made. Immigration does destroy productivity, even if it is rapidly regained it may never reach the productivity level of natives. Good points, but of course also one-sided. I enjoyed the presentation, but it's not as debate-ending as the comments make it out to be.

  15. #3875

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    Sure, and that's an argument one can make. I don't deny it, it's a good argument. But considering Scandinavia's history of humanitarianism, and their insistence on accepting so many immigrants and refugees, I don't see it as much of a problem. Especially when the economics are not fully set in stone from the information given so far. Is the quest for transparency good? Sure, I think everyone can get behind publishing of all information and statistics, even those that hurt the immigrant cause.
    great to hear this, that you acknowledge it is an economic cost. That is a big part of why I am opposed to immigration as we have it, but there are other reasons also. Such as, that refugee immigration as we have it is such a HORRIBLY innefficient way to help people, that it's immoral.

    Firstly, it is not those who are most in need that come here, but those who have the money and/or physical ability to smuggle themselves here. Such people are NOT the most needy, and many don't even flee from wars, but just come for economic reasons. Which is understandable from their perspective, but completely irrelevant if we want to help people. The most needy people, dont have the money or ability to come all the way to Sweden. But these people are ignored: Sweden spends much more money on the "refugees" that smuggle themselves here, than we do on actual people in need. To me this is utterly immoral, a great crime really. It is done because of the vanity of swedish elites, who think compassion is measured by how many brown people they can get to Sweden.

    secondly, many people die on their way to Sweden, because it's a dangerous journey of course. We lure people to travel here by promises of free money, they just have to risk their lives in our little lottery. Again this is the utterly immoral nature of swedish leaders, and their conflicting interests: on the one hand they want to appear generous and kind, so they announce to the world that everyone is welcome here and will be helped. On the other hand they realise that if everyone actually comes here, Sweden will collapse. So how can they eat their cake and keep it too? By loudly proclaiming they accept everyone, whilst secretly trying to prevent too many from actually reaching us. IF they actually wanted people to come, they could simply give them visas, so they could travel by air to Sweden, instead of risking their lives in seas. But again, they don't actually want everyone to come, they just want to look pious. Swedish politicians are the most immoral I can imagine, so self righteous, but literally they have blood on their hands for luring people into the mediterranean where they drown.

    Certainly not all of them, and as your own sources show, they stop being a drain eventually even if they don't fully recoup their costs.
    not fully recouping their costs means they are a drain.

    That the economic data is vague. We do not receive economic measurements for the children, which is understandable, considering the long time horizon, and I also do not see what happens to second-generation immigrants. Also understandable, since that expands the time horizon.
    Sweden does not keep data on ethnicity, but does keep it on nationality, and does track children of immigrants as such also. I am quite certain that I have seen data showing that even the second generation has lower productivity, for certain (iirc most of the major ones) immigrant groups. immigration has been going on for a while, so there has been time. I I recall that e.g. yugoslav immigrants, who came in the 90's, are still less productive than natives even in the second generation.

    Yes, and I don't remember him talking about second generation immigrants. I could have of course forgotten, I don't remember everything form those two hours, I only watched a couple times, but the only time I remember him talking about children was in reference to education. I remember productivity numbers, and good points were made. Immigration does destroy productivity, even if it is rapidly regained it may never reach the productivity level of natives. Good points, but of course also one-sided. I enjoyed the presentation, but it's not as debate-ending as the comments make it out to be.
    it could have been another of his presentations (which are probably only in swedish), or from his book, or from some other economist I have read/listened too. You might have to take my word for it.. not sure I can find it in english for you..

  16. #3876

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Americans are getting verbally dumber and that's thanks to liberal academic education.

    Large declines in vocabulary among American adults, they get bigger the more you progress in education.
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...8?dgcid=author

    The solution? Bankrupt the liberal academia and divide the country between American citizens and global citizens.

  17. #3877
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,389

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Not true.

    Conservative, right-wing media ala Berlusconi's mediaset TV with its low quality entertainment ala talkshows made people dumber:

    How trashy TV made children dumber and enabled a wave of populist leaders

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...=.13ddf4dde4f3
    Last edited by Morticia Iunia Bruti; July 26, 2019 at 05:32 AM.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  18. #3878
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    17,268

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Basil II the B.S View Post
    Americans are getting verbally dumber and that's thanks to liberal academic education.

    Large declines in vocabulary among American adults, they get bigger the more you progress in education.
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...8?dgcid=author

    The solution? Bankrupt the liberal academia and divide the country between American citizens and global citizens.
    Where does it blame liberals again? And do you realize that each state has its own edication curriculum it follows?

  19. #3879

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    As you liberals are so fond to tell us, you dominate the academia. Great. Then this is all your fault. All guilty.

    Meanwhile your side's war against indigenous Europeans continues. Uppsala acadamic hospital says it looks like a warzone every night.
    https://samnytt.se/vardpersonal-larm...m-en-krigszon/
    Every single advocate and/or apologist of immigration is responsibile for this and we need legislation to make it so. Liberals are using immigrants as a battering ram against Europeans and ''anti-racist'' laws to silence critics against what is under all effects a war against us. We can't live with people who want to eradicate us demographically, economically, culturally and socially.

  20. #3880
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    17,268

    Default Re: Discussion and Debate Community Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Basil II the B.S View Post
    As you liberals are so fond to tell us, you dominate the academia. Great. Then this is all your fault. All guilty.
    Colleges and universities yes. Public school dominated by liberal academia? A complete myth. Each state has its own education curriculum and then each county in wach state has its own school board (the group of people who help run the schools, make descions, ect.) Its an outright impoosible to prove that these thousands upon thousands of school biards are all liberal.

    Education is a problem in America. But politics isn't the reason and wouldn't explain so many of the current problems.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •