Immigration is actually beneficial for the economy

youtube.com/watch?v=4XQXiCLzyAw How accurate is this?

Other urls found in this thread:

telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11209234/Immigration-from-outside-Europe-cost-120-billion.html
civitas.org.uk/publications/largescaleimmigration/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees
youtu.be/vCvdXFUtCMs
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

i dont give a shit

>im dead but at least my government has more money to piss away

Good.

So why doesn't China and Israel open their borders? Why only white nations?

So your problem with immigration isn't how in effects the economy of your country, but the demographics?

Well China has an excess of cheap labor.

Immigration will always ventil money.
As any human needs a roof, something to eat, need to pee and poo...
Consequently, it'll give job in construction, agronomical industries, and a lot more.

But it doesn't create wealth at all, the land size of a country is limited (and extensively also the size of the planet), it's the same for the ressources like food, water...
It create cultural and ethnics conflicts, less land size for the native, and if you gives them the right of vote, you are sure that you'll definitly lose your sovereignety reguarding immigration, as they'll ask for always more migration.

So technically, it's somehow like that :
- We need money ?
- Let's print more money !
- Oh yeah, more money for everyone, it must be a good idea !

illegal immigration improves the economy by 1 percent, at the expense of the people at the border of course.

Increases GDP but brings down standard of living for regular people

If all you care about is (((money))), it's wonderful goy

It's beneficial in that they can be paid slave wages which liberals hate

>ALL IMMIGRANTS OF ALL KINDS WELCOME

>BUSINESSES NEED TO PAY EMPLOYEES A LIVING WAGE

So it's very relative

most research on immigration has been on european migrants coming to the US. that's why it usually reports no issues, as they are studying how educated and culturally similar individuals integrate in the US.

Also, when it is claimed that immigration brings a net benefit, usually they are considering the world economy, not natives. So, the typical idea is that natives lose a bit and migrants gain a lot, so the effect is positive overall.

> Immigration is actually beneficial for the economy

Sorry mate, we don't do facts on Sup Forums. We only trade insults and bullshit here.

Economics major here.

OP you are technically right. Immigration is a net positive - if the immigrants are not niggers.

Let me introduce the economic concept of TFP (Total Factor Productivity).

Let Y equal a countrys output, and let the the inputs (variables) be Labor (L) and Capital (K). A common function for output is:

Y(K,L) = AK^(2/3)L^(1/3)

It turns out that that countries with the exact same amount of Labour and Capital produce different amount of output. This is due to the parameter A, or TFP, which represents every other aspect of the economy - that could be technology, efficiency, education, Legal systems and Law and Order, institutions, culture, etc. - but lastly it would also include genetics and IQ

I would argue that the Africans have a permanently lower TFP because they are - on AVERAGE - genetically less intelligent, and more violent, than any other group of humans.

So importing africans will permanently lower the TFP of your country.

The same argument doesnt apply to other types of humans - asians and middleasterners are capable of being on par with europeans.

So yes, on pure economic terms, immigration is a net positive if you dont import any niggers - however there is another caveat here.

Your own video points out that the benefit is only in the longterm - in the short term we dont see those benefits and it also drives down wages and other things.

It turns out that as long as we have constant high levels of immigration, we will NEVER see these longterm benefits! Because the new immigration keeps on coming, keeping wages down, adding under-educated people, continuously adding people to cultural enclaves making sure they never integrate etc.

One of the biggest reasons the US was an economic powerhouse in the late 1800's early 1900's was because of immigration. But immigration was stopped and those immigrants integrated and we saw the long term benefits as the economy adjusted to a new equilibrium.

cont.

These days, we never reach the new equilibrium because we keep adding thousands of new shit-tier immigrants every year.

I would add that culture, language, customs etc. are also a part of TFP and so if immigrants are continuously added, these cultures never die as the immigrants never integrate, because they are in ethnic enclaves. This is what we are seeing with mexicans especially in the US, and this lowers TFP because their culture is no where near as productive as the US (Germany is an example of one of the most productive cultures).

And these are only economic examples - are we forgetting about our own culture and national and racial identity? Immigration destroys this, that is not even a question.

...

It's beneficial for the economy, not for the native workers though

Holy shit, never thought about it that way. Makes a lot of sense.

>involved in at least 1 crime
>immigrating illegally

Where does it say illegal immigration?

Dicks in your ass are beneficial for your prostate's health.

trump?

Sup Forums?

we know your dumb chart is a select few choice cherrypick bullshit

what you don't know is it defeats your argument, if those immigrants are so great, and the countries they come from so bad, who the hell is going to fix those bad countries if we keep taking their best and brightest?

just woke me

Very, it is beneficial to economy at the expense of the workers, mainly manual laborers and underclass. Immigrants drive down wages which is very beneficial for capitalists.

I don't think any sane man with a little knowledge in economy can debate immigration is bad for economy. It is not. What it is bad is for society. Thats another subject.

Thats why libertarianism faded out of popularity imho. People rather have a less efficient economy and preserve their country-indentity than the other way around

100 BILLIONS!

Those are legal immigrants. The US has decent standards when it comes to who it lets in legally.

Wow, more people = higher workforce = better economy

Fucking genius! Why didn't i think of it before?

But let's not encourage the homogenous people to reproduce and grow naturally over time, let's force feed the fucking system with third-world retards who lower the standard of living for everyone.

Well, that's a poor argument for immigration.
>pic related

>all immigration is equal
saged for massive stupdity and shilling

>Holy shit, never thought about it that way.
Of course you haven't you're a Bulgarian ffs.

Facts are leftist
Memes are the way to go

>GDP increases!


Here are two scenarios.

There are two mothers, each with one child. They pay each other for taking care of each other's child. GDP goes up

There are two mothers, each with one child. They each take care of their own child. GDP doesn't go up.

Which is better?

You are using the same argument people who favor heavy redistribution use. Redistribute so you have less social problems and TFP will increase. Just pointing this out because I know some people here will not like it.

You make it seem that we keep on compounding short-term negative effects on top of each other. The idea is that we are permanently below that equilibrium LR point but not that fair. Decrease the rate of immigration and you get closer to the LR point; increase it and you get further away. The big issue is whether we are damaging TFP because of the lack of social trust, increase in crime, worsening of institutions, etc. that you mentioned in the beginning. That fucks up your LR point.

Nonetheless, you argument is consistent with research on immigration.

telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11209234/Immigration-from-outside-Europe-cost-120-billion.html

I want to see the # of crimes. Using censored data like that can be very misleading.

The vast majority of immigrants never hold a single job in their entire lives. Let that sink in. Not only that, but they live on tax funded welfare too. Each and every immigrant costs MILLIONS.

It may very well be. But the principle of a nation-state with a strong sense of national identity, a respect for its history, heritage and cultural values precedes immediate material gains.

civitas.org.uk/publications/largescaleimmigration/

tl;dr
>Small economic gain overall
>Significant negative impact on the lower paid native population

And you have to weigh this against the impacts on culture ect.

Not remotely considering it assumes that ALL immigrants are skilled and will come and live without claiming any welfare and also are able to get a job instantly without taking it from another person. Also, it assumes that this will be the case for every descendant they produce.

>DUMPING WAGES IS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY

Wow, who would have thought.

>european immigrants in 18th century were productive
>must mean muslim immigrants from a country we're at war with will be productive

It's accurate. Capitalism is a jewish ponzi scheme. And this cancer will come to all nations that currently give limitless freedoms to money sniffers and profiteers. Enjoy.

>economy

Is it beneficial to social harmony and wellbeing of the native populace?

Short term it drives down wages, long term it increases them.

The study is based on what has actually happend in the UK over the last couple of decades btw, not just theory.

Also, not many people would argue for a complete ban on all migration. Some levels of controlled migration can be good for the economy without harming the country. It's mass migration that does the harm.

>is actually beneficial for the economy.
that is a disingenuous statement

it may benefit a certain facet of the economy specifically bigger businesses who have a larger, more desperate labor pool but it hurts the native population by flooding their local environs with more people than the infrastructure was designed to accommodate. the roads get jammed all the time, the random crime rates rise and so their standards of living drop all to benefit big businesses who get richer by having a larger consumer base while paying less to produce their shit. and by shit I mean the garbage most manufacturing produces these day.

How did we benefited from all the Gypsies you and Romania had been sending?

Sorry about that, we don't really want them either.

thanks user

Controlled immigration is great for any economy.
Uncontrolled immigration is a recipe for disaster.

4 minutes in and not a single actual argument is given

its just rhetoric

what a fucking joke

Boy I'm sure glad that the rich got richer for my complicity in flushing my fucking culture and nation down the toilet.

At least it was good for the economy for a couple people who dont give a fucking shit about my heritage.

You've signed the Geneva convention.
EU or not EU, each asylum seekers who'll reach your land is eligible for the asylum rights and protection.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees

And a crime is defined as what exactly? I was jaywalking yesterday, so I hope that doesn't make me a criminal.

there should be checks to see who actually is a refugee. Muslim men from morroco for example don't need to escape their countries.

Beneficial for the economy not for the people who live within that economy.

The government has the ability to lower the minimum wage because there is a influx of new workers who haven't spent decades fighting for a decent standard of living. EG look at the Mexican illegals.

What the fuck is up with these Pro-EU cartoonists?
You can blatantly tell they're being paid directly by Rabbi to make these

Oh boy, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and God's chosen people win again. Immigration sure is great.

You can take all of our immigrants, Bulgaria. Become rich.

Yeah, but they need to make asylum claims in the first safe country and there's a whoooollleeee lot of continent to go through baguette boy.

..that makes a lot of sense actually
>early immigration; irish, english, german, and asians
>after a generation or two, economic golden age
>begins to wane
>modern immigration; basically fucking anyone else
>economy goes to shit

Just because something increases GDP and the tax revenue the govt gets doesn't mean it's good for the average citizen.

Good for the elites who like cheap labor, but not good for the average worker.

In the absence of public welfare benefits, then immigration should always be beneficial from a macro level. The problem is that public expenditures often rise because low skilled immigrants tend to be net tax consumers. This creates an issue of opportunity cost as government resources potential could be applied elsewhere that would be more beneficial to long term growth (e.g. scientific research or infrastructure) or taxes could be lower.

>Yeah, but they need to make asylum claims in the first safe country and there's a whoooollleeee lot of continent to go through baguette boy.

>The first safe country.

It's seems that there's lot of countries in trouble around UK ...

If immigration has a slightly positive impact it's because most Immigrants tend to arrive at the most productive point in their lives. When they become old or have children the effect inevitably becomes negative.

> Immigration is actually beneficial for the economy.

if this is true, why does every third world country have such shit economies despite such high foreign born population rates?

Only the economy matters, goyim!

There's a lot of whiteys and other nationalities in china.

>it's wrong to think that your whole heritage being replaced is bad

And the immigrants cost, a fuckton. They will increase the GDP, anything increases the GDP if you add more people. Also burning buildings, especially government buildings will increase your country's GDP. Your country needs to take debt at some point to rebuild, but it'll infinitely increase your GDP. Go save your country bro, do it.

Also, GDP per capita will decrease drastically as more and more immigrants come.

>Money is more important than retaining culture and identity

Chad has a great economy, right?
Lebanon?
Nauru?

>immigrants move into enclaves
>start businesses that cater to other immigrants
>products and services are paid for with welfare checks given from native taxpayers
>avoid paying taxes themselves
>net drain on education, social programs, police
>successful members gain power politically and economically that they use exclusively to benefit their enclave

Pay to move people in so they can turn tax dollars into personal and familial wealth.

But hey, you get some delicious SANDWICHES am I right?!?!

Japan is 3rd biggest economy, virtualy homogeneous.

>ugh like, everything is going to be automated soon so we need basic income OKAY
>WE NEED THESE IMMIGRANTS TO WORK JOBS YOU WON'T WORK YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THEY WILL WORK THE JOBS

liberal_doublethink.jpeg

BIIIIIIGGG difference between immigration and unfettered asylum seeking.

We need the brains and work ethic of other nations, not their unwanted and toxic shit.

I understand, thank you. I was just interested in your opinions on the subject.
Furthermore, I do agree that cultural identity is more important than money.

>thumb nail is of uncle same with his arms around muslims and mexicans
>illuminati sign has elephant ears and trunk, obiovusly to smear the GOP

this wont be biased at all

oh wow, more money for the rich? count me in

who cares about the destruction of our people

Annexing Nigeria would technically grow the economy. Doesn't mean you should actually do it.

Everybody please google George Borjas, he destroy muh immigration myths.

youtu.be/vCvdXFUtCMs

>native crime: shoplifting and tax evasion
>immigrant crime: rape and murder

Natives commit more crimes! It's laughable

>that vid
Not surprised that it's an amerimutt shilling for cultural marxism again.

Immigration is 100% about abusing democracy to get leftists in power. Why change minds of citizens when you can just replace them.

>Eating is great! Most people die if they don't eat!
>Here, have this Cyanide

Thanks

This is the only reason for immigration. Every article or study trying to explain how immigration is good for the economy is just an example of confirmation bias or just plain brainwashing. Liberal economists invent new and confusing variables and theories to justify immigration and paint it as a positive and people fall for it constantly.

The economy is complex but there are no jobs available in the US that require someone with a certain set of qualifications that can't be found among the native population. Unless people are coming in with their own money and spending it in our country, immigration is a net negative in almost every single case, especially when the majority of them are on welfare and committing crimes.

>Liberal economists
this
of course people like krugman think immigration is good
they also couldn't pass a basic undergrad mathematics class if their life depended on it

Watch mate. Harvard professor who tells the truth about immigration but gets away with it, probably because he is also an immigrant.

Are you an economy? Is your wife or children or friends an economy? Why on earth would you expect benefits to the economy to benefit you or anyone you know? GDP can rise while average incomes decrease, and this is what happens now.

Anyone who thinks this is a good thing should go live in China.
Having a high GDP is great, right?
What are you afraid of? Not a racist, are you?

>implying we can only submit ourselves to international laws

We have the nukes even if we wanted to exterminate them the other countries will do nothing.

Skilled immigration is beneficial, not subhuman 75 iq trash
10,000 japanese=good
10,000 somalians=bad
how hard is this to understand really

are you a jew or something?

my peoples have stood on more or less these lands since pre roman times, we've stood against cesar and augustus, atilla and his huns, dschingis khan and his horsemen raped, killed and burnt down entire regions and their generations. The Black Death once killed 1/3 of every person living on these lands within a decade - the small ice age six centuries back let millions starve to death in sheer never-ending winters and summers that cannot be called that.
Countless men have died in brother wars, tribe vs tribe, principality vs principality, king vs king. We faced Napoleon in Battle, lost entire armies and million of men in the east to Stalin, to the cold - while FDR and Churchill were bombing our women, children and every city within the Reich, we had built up over the centuries.

And now, because it's good for the economy, we are to give up our people? Our way of being? For short term economic benefits?

Anybody of that mindset shall be doomed by the blood of the very ancestors, that once built this nation and our people!

No they are not.
They can claim asylum in the 1st safe country they enter.
Unless there is was in France, Belgium or Germany every one of them could be legally deported.

Sadly our judiciary is made up of oxbridge educated progressives who don't care about sending a bunch of angry brown men to live amongst the plebian masses.

Meant to say
>unless there is war in France, Belgium or Germany

If you assume humans are robots, then yes, of course an increased workforce is great for the economy and increases wealth.

But humans aren't robots, and many humans have cultural differences and hatred for western values, so letting everyone in would cause problems.

If that's the case, why are most immigrants poor here ?
Why are most of them unable to get HS education ?

>that pic
>Denmark facing rightward, screaming as giant Norway/Sweden fagmonster is about to eat him
DEEPEST LORE

>Implying most of the migrants are refugees

Even our most hardocre leftists like Timmerman said 60% of them are economic migrants, not refugees, and knowing them it is probably an underestimation.

Italiano Masserati has a point. Artifically inflated GDP is an issue here