Let's Talk Immigration

[Gary Childress]

I wouldn't need a $50,000 job if I can live on less than that; that is, if goods and services are less expensive.

Sounds like a good argument against minimum wage. If we abolish minimum wage that would tend to make goods and services more affordable as well, perhaps offsetting the lower wages. Let the market dictate what is a fair wage and not the government.

Back on track: Perhaps you have a good point as far as immigration. Perhaps letting people flow freely in and out of countries would be offset by lower prices on goods and services. It would also lower the wealth gap between countries (or should I say regions since there would be no countries so to speak). So the world would become one big country with freedom of movement. Sounds like a good goal for humanity as it would abolish much of the reason for wars. Instead of wars it would be more like "civil wars" if there were any.

Even given the unrealistic scenario (migration is not a decision one takes lightly), those Chinese will still be sharing the country with other Asians, Europeans, Africans and Latin Americans.

Another good point. Surely the country would become more multi-cultural. Perhaps the world needs an outlet for different cultures to mingle and dissolve the boundaries between peoples.

 

[Cutlass]

ZPG is to sustain the people already here. Not punish anyone

And the way to get to sustainability is to get people out of poverty.

 

[Flying Pig]

Sounds like a good argument against minimum wage. If we abolish minimum wage that would tend to make goods and services more affordable as well, perhaps offsetting the lower wages. Let the market dictate what is a fair wage and not the government.

The point of the minimum wage is that the Government are saying it's not OK for people to 'choose' (how much it's a free choice is a matter for debate) a job which pays them too little for them to have a decent standard of living. The Free Market puts all options into play; we restrict some of them - for example, prohibiting the sale of certain things, such as political offices and court decisions.

 

[Gary Childress]

The point of the minimum wage is that the Government are saying it's not OK for people to 'choose' (how much it's a free choice is a matter for debate) a job which pays them too little for them to have a decent standard of living. The Free Market puts all options into play; we restrict some of them - for example, prohibiting the sale of certain things, such as political offices and court decisions.

But doesn't "minimum wage" artificially hike up the prices of goods and services to a point where some can't afford them anyway? Sure then we raise the minimum wage again but then the price of goods and services goes up again, doesn't it? So it's almost a recipe for perpectual inflation, at least until the economy tanks or something.

What if Friedman is right? Get rid of government (at least as much as possible) and let the market run itself?

 

[Flying Pig]

Yes, we know that introducing a minimum wage into a free market is harmful to economic efficiency; people as a whole will have less money. We just consider it a price worth paying so that those at the bottom still have a reasonable standard of living.

 

[Traitorfish]

What if Friedman is right? Get rid of government (at least as much as possible) and let the market run itself?

Y'know how George Orwell said that pacifists during WW2 were "de facto pro-Hitler"? Well, Friedman is de facto pro-Lenin.

 

[Murky]

But doesn't "minimum wage" artificially hike up the prices of goods and services to a point where some can't afford them anyway? Sure then we raise the minimum wage again but then the price of goods and services goes up again, doesn't it? So it's almost a recipe for perpectual inflation, at least until the economy tanks or something.

What if Friedman is right? Get rid of government (at least as much as possible) and let the market run itself?

Only in places where the minimum wage is tied to inflation. Most wages have stagnated while costs of living have increased. The working poor are screwed either way.

 

[Gary Childress]

Y'know how George Orwell said that pacifists during WW2 were "de facto pro-Hitler"? Well, Friedman is de facto pro-Lenin.

Why? Is Friedman proposing communism?

 

[Traitorfish]

Why? Is Friedman proposing communism?

He's inviting it.

 

[Cutlass]

But doesn't "minimum wage" artificially hike up the prices of goods and services to a point where some can't afford them anyway? Sure then we raise the minimum wage again but then the price of goods and services goes up again, doesn't it? So it's almost a recipe for perpectual inflation, at least until the economy tanks or something.

What if Friedman is right? Get rid of government (at least as much as possible) and let the market run itself?

Productivity is a variable. Employers have an incentive to raise productivity in exchange for higher wages. So they don't inherently lead to inflation.

 

[Tahuti]

H1-B visa holders certainly do

That's because H1-B visa's requires the holder to apply for a new visa once employment which was the basis for the H1-B visa is terminated or be forced to leave the US and that in turn allows employers to impose unfavorable working conditions compared to US citizens and Green card holders and making it impossible for US citizens and Green card holders to compete with H1-B workers. Which is why H1-B visa's should be abolished and its current holders get an EB-3 visa (and the quota for both EB-3 and EB-2 should increase with at least the current size of H1-B each, because these have a horrible backlog).

Both EB-2 and EB-3 visa's are types of green cards, with the only difference is being the conditions on which they may be granted

 

[Babbler]

That is bull****.

First, you're reducing people to little more than economic units, which is disgusting; second, you completely ignore the costs of immigration. Ignoring the issues of culture, integration, social cohesion, etc. is suicidal; third, the chief responsibility of a government is to take care of its people, not of other people. Opening floodgates for new immigrants is akin to doing the same in real life. Everybody loses.

It is disgusting to view people as units of workforce that are essentially interchangeable. It's worse than disgusting - it's wrong, because it ignores human nature, or more specifically, human tendency towards cultural differentiation.

Exactly! But you need to be more concrete here. Let's illustrate this with an example:

For the most part, southern Europeans are relieved to find refuge in towns in this largely rural region in the state of Baden-Württemberg. But the strains of differing languages and cultures make many of the young migrants hang back when it comes to longer-term commitments like registering their cars here or signing up for two-year cellphone contracts.

...

Yet the migration — while urgently needed at the moment by both sides — has stirred fears that it may be conferring yet another advantage on Europe’s most powerful economy. German exporters have benefited from a euro dragged down in value by the struggling southern countries, and they are able to borrow money at rock-bottom rates as investors seek safe havens. Now, as the southern countries watch their young people move north, some are grumbling of a brain drain as well.

“This generation of young people who are leaving are our best qualified ever,” said César Castel, the director of operations for the Spanish branch of Adecco, a Swiss headhunting firm. “It is a huge loss of investment for Spain. On average it cost us 60,000 euros to train each engineer, and they are leaving.” That is about $80,000.

...

Many of the Spaniards say the work environment in Germany takes getting used to, with Germans far more direct than Spanish people and much quieter. No one makes personal calls during business hours, for instance. But the work day is much shorter.

They were surprised that they were expected to greet co-workers each morning with formal handshakes and to call colleagues “Herr” and “Frau” (Mr. and Ms.). Impromptu hallway conversations over work issues were cut off by Germans suggesting it would be more appropriate to schedule a formal meeting.

The German fondness for order, often joked about, has proved true, said Carlos Baixeras, 30, an engineer who started working near Frankfurt 18 months ago. “There are rules for everything,” he said. “There’s a trash police.”

Notice the high costs paid by both the recipient country (e.g. companies need mentors to help the migrants learn the language and culture adequately) and particularly by the donor country (lost of people, particularly the young and educated). With such differences in culture and language, you can't just assume that workforce here is essentially interchangeable. In fact, you probably can't assume that the economies are the same -- any common economic institutions and policies between these countries would probably not be adequate for either country.

But as you said, the remedy is obvious: given the obvious differences in culture, having a free flow of people is disgusting, and it would best for these countries to restrict the flow of people. Any common customs (or indeed, economic) institutions that would treat them as the same must be dissolved.