Back

@ChrisMayLA6 I don't think anyone can dispute that migration has been normal. This can be proven easily with DNA tests.

What is causing all the trouble is mass-migration of people to a welfare state. The problem with that is the sudden increase of volume, and, that the people who live in the recipient state feel they have to pay for other peoples livelihood.

Add to that cultural collisions when a stoneage religion collides with modern liberal values and you have the recipe for disaster.

@ChrisMayLA6 Now perform the thought experiment of what would happen if migration was entirely free, no passports required.... but, no welfare state. You can move wherever you want, but no one will be forced to pay for you.

I think that is the only recipe for successful migration, along with a respect for property rights.

@h4890

What's interesting is the data show that migrants are net contributors to economies; working harder (after all its a self-selection mechanism for the most resourceful & risk ready) & using the welfare state less....

Certainly the media & populists may claim they're a drain but actually for many ageing societies they are what is propping up economic activity....

Govt.s know this but feel pressured by press' focus on the small proportion of refugees....

@ChrisMayLA6 This I think must surely be different for different countries. In sweden, the cost of immigrants living off welfare is far, far higher than ethnic swedes, also add to that the cost of crime and the cost of terrorist financing and terrorist financing.

Finally, there is no way to tell, to everyones great frustration, the state of the economy without decades of immigration.

Then there is the question of which kind of immigrants. One of the most wealthy and successful countries on

@ChrisMayLA6 the planet, switzerland, has very little immigration. And the immigration they do have was mainly from southern europe.

I think another case could be made that having european immigrants is far, far better for the economy than arabian or african ones.

@h4890

Well, certainly, the UK has been patterned by migration for centuries, so without migration the country would look very different, but hard to unwind quite what that effect would be.... I think the data posted shows that the refugee migrants are a smallish proportion.

Of course, the reason they are costly (in the UK at lest) is they're not allowed to work; if they could work then they wouldn't need to be so supported by the benefits... & the economy would likely gain

@ChrisMayLA6 Ahh... this is actually one of my favourite arguments against minimum wage. It locks people out of the job market! =)

Are we in agreement about that one? ;)

@h4890

No I'm afraid not.... the evidence in the UK suggests that it doesn't d that, although it does distort low wage employment by making the minimum wag rate not a floor on all wages but rather a widespread norm... not quite the effect people might have hoped for - more often people are locked out of the job market by Govt. regulations (as per previous. post) or due to skill deficiencies....

@ChrisMayLA6 But how can that be? Looking at it from an _individual_ point of view as a business owner, if minimum be very high, I would rather hire people abroad, especially if the work performed does not pay for the salary, in which case the hire would never even take place in the first place.

It is just fundamental arithmetic for a business owner and to me, the argument that high minimum wages lock people out of the market is very obvious.

@h4890

Yes, and this was the argument put forward by businesses in the UK before the MW was introduced.... however, it was introduced at a low level & slowly increased to where it is today (which is still relatively low), and has had relatively little impact on employment - rather employers have needed both to manage staff better & introduce productivity gains - its not been perfect but it has reduced in-work poverty to some extent. Businesses now merely argue the MW shouldn't be too high!

@ChrisMayLA6 I guess perhaps another way to see it is like this. If minimum wage is set below the market wage, no one cares about it, and it fills no function. If it is set above market wage, it is a negative and will lock people out.

@h4890

Well again, this is what's interesting - the UK MW is above a market-clearing wage, but not so much as to cause the theoretical effects posited by economists (and business people). What it does do is (where it is enforced, and it isn't universally enforced) to ensure those in the weakest position, low skilled workers, are not completely without some social protection as regards wage levels.... these debates were well exercise in the run up making this a real life 'experiment'....