It’s not controversial, it’s just wrong. Immigration never takes jobs away, it always allows to create more jobs by inflating the local economy. Miami absorbed Cuban migrants after Mariel, and went richer. It has been widely studied now: immigrants took first low paying jobs that were understaffed, it injected more money in the local economy and it allowed spouses who were not working because they were doing the low paying jobs for free (nannying for instance) to get back to high paying jobs, it injects more money…
Same in Germany with Syrian intake
It isn’t always true tho it is true for developed countries with low birth rates. For many developing countries immigrants taking low level jobs is a negative because there isn’t enough high level jobs. And I am saying this as someone who is supportive of immigration
And the USA is in that group now. We have about 1.78 births per women in the us and that number is declining. You need a birth rate of over 2 per women in order to sustain a population without immigration. If a place does not sustain their population their economy cannot grow and if your birth rate is lower than 2 immigration is the only viable option to sustain it. Less people = less specialized jobs = less overall jobs = worse economy.
@git@drolex that seems to assume that individuals born in a particular geographic region should have better access to employment than those born somewhere else. Am I understanding you correctly?
It doesn’t always work out man, I live it in first person, they don’t integrate don’t work because we need every last job we have and distrust public peace
It’s not controversial, it’s just wrong. Immigration never takes jobs away, it always allows to create more jobs by inflating the local economy. Miami absorbed Cuban migrants after Mariel, and went richer. It has been widely studied now: immigrants took first low paying jobs that were understaffed, it injected more money in the local economy and it allowed spouses who were not working because they were doing the low paying jobs for free (nannying for instance) to get back to high paying jobs, it injects more money… Same in Germany with Syrian intake
It isn’t always true tho it is true for developed countries with low birth rates. For many developing countries immigrants taking low level jobs is a negative because there isn’t enough high level jobs. And I am saying this as someone who is supportive of immigration
Any citations of this effect? (not calling you a liar, your argument passes the logical sniff test, just looking for actual data if you know of any)
And the USA is in that group now. We have about 1.78 births per women in the us and that number is declining. You need a birth rate of over 2 per women in order to sustain a population without immigration. If a place does not sustain their population their economy cannot grow and if your birth rate is lower than 2 immigration is the only viable option to sustain it. Less people = less specialized jobs = less overall jobs = worse economy.
@git @drolex that seems to assume that individuals born in a particular geographic region should have better access to employment than those born somewhere else. Am I understanding you correctly?
It doesn’t always work out man, I live it in first person, they don’t integrate don’t work because we need every last job we have and distrust public peace