But...but...but...how can that be true? Trump says it is the immigrants fault. Trump is smart; he knows watering tumbleweed prevents wild fires.
Minimum wage has doubled in most places in the past 4 years.
Wages vary by industry and geography, but...Do you have a link to that ?
Nominal minimum wage has gone up in the UK, but employers have a variety of techniques for not paying it, so real minimum wage has probably not gone up so much.
Clearly, you know nothing about living in the American southwest or rural white America.
I was replying on what I observe "elsewhere". You can reply on the southwest USA perhaps?
But even I can point out to you that in California, during the 1950-70s the larbour unions were major opponents of more immigration, as they recognized its consequences. Including a labour unions of agriculture workers led by a mexican-american, shose name unfortinately is gone from my memory now..
That was 50-60 years ago and the world and CA agriculture were different. Chavez had his goals for his union campaigns. His strikes were effective at the time. The population was different, politics were different, and the immigration issues were different. In the 1960s many college students boycotted CA lettuce.I was replying on what I observe "elsewhere". You can reply on the southwest USA perhaps?
But even I can point out to you that in California, during the 1950-70s the larbour unions were major opponents of more immigration, as they recognized its consequences. Including a labour unions of agriculture workers led by a mexican-american, shose name unfortinately is gone from my memory now..
It should be noted that the overwhelming consensus in "economic theory" has looked at exactly this question of whether immigrants drive up prices for various things and found the opposite:
That was 50-60 years ago and the world and CA agriculture were different. Chavez had his goals for his union campaigns. His strikes were effective at the time. The population was different, politics were different, and the immigration issues were different. In the 1960s many college students boycotted CA lettuce.
If you cannot post reasonably current links (that are not just opinions) to support what you say, stop spamming your opinions.No, economists do not agree that immigration creates more demand and somehow improves the economy.
Do Illegal Alien Workers Depress Wages and Worsen Working Conditions for Native or Legal Workers?
Our qualified answer to the above title question is that illegal workers do, in some cases, depress wages and worsen working conditions for native or legal workers who directly compete with them for jobs.
Immigration rates in the US aren't even particularly high. People always talk like it's something abnormally massive but it's somewhere in the middle rungs among rich countries.
View attachment 716531
So the US was wrong to let all those Irish, Italians, Germans, Chinese, Swedes, Poles, etc. into the country no questions asked?
It's not about the proportion. It's about where they come from. The anti-immigation folks don't even deny this.Immigration rates in the US aren't even particularly high. People always talk like it's something abnormally massive but it's somewhere in the middle rungs among rich countries.
View attachment 716531
This is half correct. A problem with our current illegal immigration situation is that we are receiving large numbers of unskilled workers, who are depressing wages among all unskilled workers. They also compete for the same goods and services, driving up prices, and the influx is occurring more rapidly than home construction can take place, leading to increased rent and home prices. In general, unskilled workers are mostly only able to enter through a land border, most often from Mexico, either originally from Mexico or another Latin American country. Also in general, most coming from beyond the Americas must purchase a plane ticket and at the least have a visa in order to land, making it more likely that they are skilled workers or professional, and thus outside the scope of the current problem.It's not about the proportion. It's about where they come from. The anti-immigation folks don't even deny this.
Singapore isn't OECD so not in the chart, but the foreign born population there is about 46%. Of about 6 million, you've got a bit under 2 million non residents and another million residents born outside Singapore, about half a million of those born in Malaysia.It's not about the proportion. It's about where they come from. The anti-immigation folks don't even deny this.
PS: It's interesting Singapore is not in the list. I think the government might not release that data because it's an unpopular thing here too (it is getting a little overcrowded in recent years).
This is what I was responding to. ^^^It's not our responsibility to open our borders to the entire world. Let Mexico and Canada step up and take them, I'm done with the US being the only country who is supposed to take care of everyone.
Legality wasn't the issue.It was legal back then.
You may be correct about this much.You quote The Atlantic, really? That's the american The Economist. A liberal rag throughout. No, economists do not agree that immigration creates more demand and somehow improves the economy. Most will write papers claiming that because they feed at the hand of Capital one way or another. Making it as part of the manegarial class means obeing the powers above, acting as a good helper.