Premise 1: Competition is good for the economy

>Premise 1: Competition is good for the economy

>Premise 2: Economic migrants increase competition

>Conclusion: Economic migrants are good for the economy

Other urls found in this thread:

businessinsider.com/r-number-of-migrants-claiming-benefits-in-germany-surges-by-169-percent-2016-9
archive.is/EsVVg
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

You got a hidden third premise that economic migrants do not have negative impacts on the economy

They are only good when you have a super majority of your population doing high skilled work.

welfare migrants don't compete, they consume

sounds like SAGE

Competition isn't always a good thing.
Neither is over saturation.

The phrase 'healthy competition' exists.
Unless of course you're looking at this in a very cold inhuman way, darwinian almost, in which case, I guess they are.

The situation is much more complicated than 'Migrants good', as the supply and demand will destroy a lot of lives, and you will effectively create a caste system, of people working for minimum wage with low IQs usually (Otherwise they'd be doing other work).

You'd create a dystopia :)

>Economic migrants increase competition
hahaha, hahahaHAHHAHA, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>BRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPP

They force your native citizens to lower their standard of living in order to compete with desperate 3rd worlders

>premise two is completely false
over 70% of Hispanics in America are on welfare. I can't even imagine the welfare drainage of economic migrants in Europe.

Yes, the destruction of our values and culture are worth an extra .5% growth in GDP annually.

>ANAL ANAL ANAL AANALA NALNLNALNL

>Economic migrants are good for the economy

It's 100% true if you give up on the white race. I'm not saying whether that's a good or bad thing. It just is. It increases male competition. You can't argue against that. Whoever wins, wins. What are you going to do about it?

When viewing the system in abstract, the conclusion is somewhat correct. What it overlooks is that economic migrants will also result in significant negative effects for the people who's jobs they compete for. Under most circumstances, the people who's jobs they compete for are lower class, and being in the lower class, have the least ability to provide for themselves, making this threat to their economic security unacceptable.

>>Premise 2: Economic migrants increase competition

Being criminal welfare parasites ≠ competing

It's not really increasing competition accross the board though. It's oversaturating the labour market giving all the power to employers. If there were a proportionate amount of business owners comming in, this would be a valid premise.

What you're describing is like having the government subsize the construction of 60 shoe stores in the same strip plaza.

Except they don't work, they leech off of welfare, and they bring negative externalities such as crime and declining property values. They only increase competition in the very low skilled labor which is less needed in European countries.

Even accepting your premises and the resultant conclusion, I'm afraid you miss the mark. In fact, you don't understand the question.

The job of a nation is to serve it's people, protect their interests and strive to bring them happiness. While wealth is a factor, it is not the only gauge-- it's not even the most important one. Things like social cohesion and shared history, traditions and values play as important a role.

Humans don't just need decent jobs and wages to achieve happiness.

There is more to a country than its economy. A country does not exist to serve the economy. an economy exists to serve the country.

Stop reducing countries to just their economy

Migrants don't compete, they either live off gibs or work for sticks.

> Increases competition
Who is this good for?
Corporations. A bunch of poor people being shoved into your community doesn't help you, it drives down your housing prices and your wages.

What you truly want is economic stability not economic growth. Economic growth only helps corporations and the government, it doesn't help you.

Living conditions will suffer, but corporations will make more money by paying low-skilled workers less money. Low-skilled workers deserve it because they don't try hard enough and are clearly shit in comparison. They're lower in the hierarchy. What will anyone do about it?

If they have any marketable skills yes. Imagine hundreds of doctors and engineers showing up to a nation. However these people are third world savages that will only compete for gibs that is destroying and leeching of the market economy.

Incorrect. Let me fix that for you.

>Premise 1: Competition between businesses is good for the economy

>Premise 2: Economic migrants decrease competition between businesses

>Conclusion: Economic migrants are bad for the economy

So don't give them welfare, problem solved.

Stopping welfare for migrants is a lot easier than deporting tons of people and putting a whitlows of security on the border

Premise 1: ...for the consumer

Premise 2: ...for the worker

Conclusion: Economic migrants screw the worker who is the consumer, so it screws everybody but the employer who fears competition and uses the profits to buy politicians to crush any competition with regulations and legal sanctions.

I'm not sure some of you people understand... The reason minorities are being shipped in to Europe, and 30m spics have been allowed into the US is because Jews are trying to increase Western reproduction rates in order to compete economically with China.

What are you going to do about it?

>Premise 1: Competition is good for the (((economy)))
I never saw jews competing with each other. Good economy is up to goyim i guess, god's chosen prefer to not cannibalize each other.

>I never saw jews competing with each other

Where does the "idk who's Jewing who" meme come from?

Most migrants are illiterate in their own language and have no useful skills, so the end up on welfare and bankrupt their host countries. I hasn't worked in America with the metizos either. Besides, money is not the benchmark of a healthy nation, being able to take care and protect the people who belong there is.

This also presupposes that "growth" results in a higher quality of life for the average citizen.

So you're leaving out differing economic goals.

Unchecked you have shit like Hong Kong, where "growth" is huge and the "economy" is great, but its a fucking insane dystopia nightmare of life.

So shit like gdp and output rising aren't really measures of a desirable country in and of themselves.

But, of course, you knew that and were just trolling.

Corporations do not care about societal conditions. They don't care if the West turns into Brazil or China. The Western governments want to compete with China.

Like Japan, you don't need to increase reproduction rates in an already overcrowded land when we are steadily moving towards automating everything.

>1 post by this ID

A perfect example of a deductive fallacy..

>All these armchair economists

i agree, but they have to come legally
i want more competition at the top- not fucking picking lettuce, selling drugs, working at McD's, cleaning hotel rooms, et cetera

>implying truth is relative
>implying OP isn't the same
>implying you aren't a faggot

They help as long as there is no welfare system.

Hey Hans, how many of your nigger refugees are actually working of even capable of doing any kind of work ?
1% to 3% to be generous ?

>Premise 2: Economic migrants increase competition
No.
Migrants can't even provide for themselves, so they are not competitive.

>sorry but you don't get any breaks any more, your shift length is increased to 19 hours, and you get paid 1/10 of what you previously earned and if you don't like it there are 50 migrants ready to take your place

That's the way it goes. You had to have been on top or you're destined to be a slave. Life itself and everything about it is a competition. You're losing.

>Premise 3: welfare state

>I want to live in absolutely deplorable conditions so the (((highest earners))) can have slightly more money

wtf im a free market capitalist now?!

>Economic migrants increase competition

They don't. The migrants in the EU don't even fucking work.

False premise. Into the oven you go.

businessinsider.com/r-number-of-migrants-claiming-benefits-in-germany-surges-by-169-percent-2016-9

Please archive
archive.is/EsVVg

Competition drives prices down, ideally; competition via economic migrants drives... wages down.

Why would any working person want their wages to go down intentionally?

Also, there is zero guarantee said migrants become employed.

I never said I agreed with it. The point is... life is a competition. Wtf are you gonna do about it?

The original Reuters story has already been pulled down. No link to the original source now.

Premise 2 would be true if migrants had something to compete with ,wouldn't it?

You can't honestly put french people on the same level as africans, muslims and asians.

>>Premise 2: Economic migrants increase competition
Unless you're not an idiot that competes for jobs with shitskins.

Yes. You should study engineering or something high-skilled to avoid that.

Oh. And here's Sandeep, the new H1-B hire. You need to train him as your replacement if you want your severance package.

Premise 1: Availability of resources is the ultimate determinant of living standards

Premise 2: Living standards are low.

Conclusion: War of extermination against the Muslims to steal their delicious oils.

How does a

Close the borders.

he can load and unload things, he can drive (badly).
This will compete with the 90 IQ men in construction who will then be forced to edge in and try to undercut the 100 IQ men in their chosen field, who will then try to undercut the 110 IQ men in their chosen field.

...

Competition infers contribution economically, immigrants do, illegal immigrants don't... If you took anything other than easy ass learn-to-be-a-victim classes, you would know this.

If only it was that simple. But yes a lot of people who can't rely on welfare and must work for a living are what made America great and can make any country great.

There's always a left though, and they'll fuck it all up with welfare any chance they get.

>yeah, just cut welfare from people unwilling or
>unable to compete on the job market.

like they will look for work and not rob your shit or trick the system.

then they just balkanize the low rent areas of the cities, sublet to the point of creating health hazards, create gangs and set up low quality shops that undercut the white man.

>he can drive (badly)
No, user, really no.

And you domino effect thing also does not work. If you are a 30+ year old baker, you can't just switch to another job and hope to compete there.
After you have invested a certain amount of time in a job you are stuck with it.

The only thing these migrants do, is compete with low skilled workers. And the statistics say that they don't even do that.

Champaign socialist, Schultz-dildo ramming, junior year Green voter, trust fund student with self-esteem issues recognised

competition between corporations, competition among employees reduces average real wages what causes lower wares and services demand and smaller domestic market.

I simple words, more competitors for a job > lower wages > less Iphones per capita.
"Fortunately" shitskins won't work, they just want gibs, What is a burden for welfare system and at the end the stupid Helmut has to pay for gibs again with his taxes.

DAILY REMINDER!

...

not only that, but if we cut welfare they'll stop coming

within reason. if you let in 100 million low wage chinese who are willing to do your job for $1/hr, does it help the economy or just the corporations?

think retard