Consolidated Immigration Issues Thread


#42

Ever hear Ad hominem is a fallacy?

If you can’t argue the case on the merits, if you have to go after the people making it, you just admitted your argument is done.

Singapore, Hong Kong, and the Swiss together debunk your viewpoint on immigration.

If you were right, they would be suffering, instead, they prosper more than us.

Nativism is a fallacy Dave, you don’t need to “protect jobs” to help natives.


#43

The Swiss are cracking down on illegal immigration–as is much of Europe. Singapore and Hong Kong aren’t so afflicted in recent years. Give it up. Your arguments are nonsense.


#44

Which has precisely NOTHING to do with what I posted. Do you even BOTHER to read what you’re responding to, AS?


#45

Hey Dave, know what our foreign-born rate is?

Close to half of that:

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/chapter-5-u-s-foreign-born-population-trends/

And you try to complain it’s “too high”. If that was true, why aren’t the Swiss overwhelmed? Can you explain it?

It gets even worse when we look at Singapore, where 64% of the citizens are foreign born. They have an additional 30% of their population as foreign migrants living among them.

So again, why aren’t the Natives suffering, when immigration in these places is so damn high?

They have low illegal immigration btw, because they welcome Bracero-like workers. They don’t see a problem in letting low-skilled people in. So why aren’t the natives suffering?


#46

What has the term “foreign born” have to do with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION? Trying to hijack yet ANOTHER thread?


#47

No, this topic isn’t about illegal immigration solely, and this discussion were having, started when I said this:

You decided to argue with me on this Dave. So now I’m saying: Stand & deliver.

What is your explanation? Why are their natives not suffering despite these place being flooded with low-skilled immigrants?

Do you even have an answer?


#48

As a people become affluent, the often CEASE to be productive on their own and either hire outsiders to do sweat-producing labor or buy their food and fiber from other peoples. That’s largely what took Spain from an economic powerhouse to a relatively impoverished, 2nd world nation in a bit under 2 centuries. It’s why TODAY, Kuwait has more Koreans and Chinese living there than native Kuwaitis, which is a recipe for eventual disaster for Kuwait. There’s a VAST difference between a couple of million “strangers” and 40 or 50 million of them, regardless of the numbers of native-born in any given country.


#49

? What? These economies aren’t becoming less productive, their growth rates are either as good or higher than ours.

This “sweat producing labor”, or industrialization, is how Human capital is transmitted. It’s how people reach Western lifestyles in their own way overtime. China’s experience, with its newly minted 300 million middle class, shows this to be true.

This is something the Left frequently gets wrong about it, you shouldn’t repeat their error. If the Left wasn’t wrong, all of those Chinese people would still be poor.

No… you got it backwards. Small economies can’t possibly produce everything they need for themselves; so they outsource. They bet explicitly on Free market forces.

Re-export, and re-manufacture. I don’t think you’re very familiar with these things, and you should seek to be, to know what’s going on. To know why Free Markets are successful.


#50

BS. I notice that you simply ignored my Spanish example. Spain WAS an economic powerhouse. As Spain’s wealth grew from exploitation of the New World, it’s people STOPPED making things for themselves and started “outsourcing” its manufacturing–PAYING for those things with their new-found gold and silver. In just a couple of centuries, Spain had no gold OR manufacturing and was no longer an economic powerhouse. They’d done most of their outsourcing to France and England who replaced them.

You simply CANNOT get away with comparing a 330 million person economy with a 15-25 million person economy. The two operate in entirely different dynamics.


#51

Because it isn’t true: Spain wasn’t accepting diddly squat at home other than Gold.

They became poor because empires don’t pay for themselves, they overextended their forces.

War abroad, war in the Netherlands, war with Portugal, losing the Armada to a War with Britian, who gain naval supremacy. Iran is becoming poor for the same reason today, exporting war.

Spain was in the throes of Mercantilism; it wasn’t accepting any goods not made within its empire, and the “new World” wasn’t their manufacturing source, it was where they got resources, the same as Britain.

Your entire point, was that foreigners wreck havoc on natives… if that were true, it should be far more evident on smaller countries, who are far more vulnerable to even slight demographic shifts.


#52

Not necessarily “more susceptible” when they’ve always paid close attention to WHO they allowed to settle in Switzerland…for that matter, also in Singapore. I remember when the Singapore coast guard turned back dozens of shiploads of Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees trying to land there and make their way to the U.S.

You’re wrong about Spain, too, by the way. Spain’s furniture manufacturers virtually disappeared once they started getting vast amounts of gold and silver from the New World. They started buying BRITISH-made furniture, instead, because it was more ornate, sturdier and considered more desirable by CONSUMERS. As a result, Spain acquired a lot of expensive, British-made furniture and Britain got a lot of Spanish gold and silver.


#53

Dave; i just told you that 30% of Singapore population is migrant workers, most of whom come from Malaysia, and are no richer than the average Mexican

I’m not asking about whether they turn away anyone, I’m saying their immigration rate is more double ours, and most of those they let in are poor… And need I remind, Muslim.

They mishandled their economy. Either by protecting it too much, or by overtaxing it:

sheep farmers, grain farmers, skilled dutch woodworkers, all saw their industries fold under the Spanish Kings in the 16th century.

Meanwhile, ‘decentralized and free-market Holland, and in particular the city of Amsterdam, replaced Flanders and Antwerp as the main commercial and financial centre in Europe.’

Flanders and Antwerp had been in Spanish hands, and were basically crippled by their mismanagement.

Spain, was no example of Free market principles in practice. Cronyism abounded.


#54

Who was it that claimed Spain was an example of the “free market?” Certainly not I. Spain did what Singapore, Kuwait, Dubai and other small economies are doing right now…OUTSOURCING their labor and spending their wealth to pay for it.


#55

No, the successful Small economies are living examples of the Free market.

Know how I know? Because most of them are higher than us on the Market Freedom index:

We’re position #18. We’ve been falling for over a decade.


#56

Why do you suppose so many Chinese are coming HERE then, instead of immigrating to Singapore or Hong Kong?


#57

It depends on what your skills are relevant in, or where you have contacts/family. Hong Kong and Singapore may not have the industry they’re looking to work in.

It can also be cost of living.

Chinese move to Malayasia for the same reason. There’s a big population of them there.


#58

Which really doesn’t explain my question, AS. WHY come to the U.S. if conditions are so great in Singapore and Hong Kong?


#59

Yes it does.

The industry they have in skills in may not be there, or the cost of living may be too high, or they may already have family here. Those are all relevant answers to your question.

Opportunity, family, cost.


#60

And if a frog had wings, it wouldn’t bump its butt every time it jumped.


#61

Hey Dave; why are there more Chinese in Malayasia?

Why do Canada and Australia, countries less than 1/10 our size, have populations of Chinese more than 1/4 to 1/3 of our own?