Quote: (03-01-2017 03:28 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:
In a sense, a so called "merit" based immigration system is far worse than even the clusterfuck we have today. Instead of low skilled immigrants taking the shitty jobs, we'll instead have high skilled immigrants taking the good jobs.
Or since this is a game forum, I'll put it this way: currently we have foreigners being brought in to fuck our 2s and 3s. Under a skill based system, we'll have foreigners brought in to fuck our 7s and 8s, which is worse. There is a limited supply of hot women in any country, and there is a limited supply of good jobs, as well. It's bad enough that we have Mexicans taking shitty fast food and construction jobs away from Americans. It's way worse if we have Indians and Chinese taking the few precious jobs we have left in finance, engineering, and medicine from Americans.
And yes, they'll still vote Democrat just like the Mexicans because they're smart enough to realize the Democrats are the vehicle to loot and seize control from the white population for their own ethnic blocs.
A couple counter-arguments to the idea that bringing in skilled foreigners is "worse":
From an American consumer's point of view, it's better to increase the supply of competent labor in every field possible, both skilled and unskilled, because it increases the amount of competition and pushes down the price of goods and services. From an American producer's point of view, it's helpful when immigrants come in (as long as they're not specialists in the producer's own trade), because they'll be consuming his products.
Let's say you're an American bricklayer, and the federal government is letting in a bunch of Indian radiologists. When you go to get an X-ray, you now pay a lower price, so in terms of "real wages," you've gotten a pay increase, because your dollar goes further than it did before the immigrants arrived. Plus those Indian radiologists are probably buying houses, increasing the quantity demanded of your bricklaying services.
As your bricklaying business expands, maybe you have to hire more accountants to keep track of the money, or you're rich enough that you can afford LASIK, or to go on vacation. So more skilled jobs (accountant, surgeon, airline pilot, etc.) in the domestic economy end up being created. Some of those professionals will be your customers as well.
From a macro perspective, the economy starts operating more efficiently because there are workers available to fill every niche. We are able to leverage
comparative advantage.
Or to put it in game terms, if we let in foreign men, yeah, they might compete with the local men for the available women. If you're a father, though, you can now marry off your daughter to a richer or otherwise higher-quality man, and your grandchildren end up better off. (On the other hand, if the foreign men aren't as high-quality, then they can't compete anyway with the local men, so they're irrelevant.) To assess the overall impact, you have to look at the whole picture rather than just one part of life (i.e. your own ability to bang 8s and 9s).
The cultural and political aspects of letting in immigrants are a whole different matter than the economic implications. If we wanted, we could change the Constitution (either through an amendment, or a creative reinterpretation) to limit the franchise to whatever class of citizens we think would govern the best. That's how it's been done throughout much of U.S. and British history. It's totally plausible that there could be some immigrants who could make good contributions to the country economically, but would be a political liability. (
Indian immigrants do tend to lean left, as you say. Although they would not be able to elect leftist politicians without help from a lot of native-born Americans.)