ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, September 26, 2016

At best, an economic wash

As John Red Eagle and I demonstrated in Cuckservative, large numbers of immigrants are not good for the economy. Moreover, the biggest econonomic study on the matter to date has concluded that at best, the net economic benefits of immigrants are nonexistent.
Keep in mind that this economics study does not even begin to take into account the cultural destruction that is caused by immigration.
Immigration has been and will continue to be a hot button topic in the 2016 presidential campaign.  Trump has called for a wall along the U.S. southern border with Mexico and a halt to all immigration from certain "countries of concern to national security."  Meanwhile, Hillary has called for more relaxed immigration policies that would grant illegal immigrants a path to citizenship and a surge in Syrian refugees.

But, no matter where you stand politically on immigration, a group of the nation's "smartest" professors from the most elite schools in the country recently came together to publish a 500-page study for the "National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine" on the economic and fiscal impacts of immigration.  After what must have been countless months of research, the report seems to confirm what most people could have derived from applying simple logic, namely that while immigration expands the economy it also negatively impacts the employment of low-skilled native workers and places undue burden on federal and state entitlements like food assistance programs and Medicaid.

The full 500-page immigration study can be reviewed at the end of this post but here are the key takeaways...

First, the study finds that the lower median age of immigrants is a positive offset to the aging U.S. population and serves to enlarge the economy but notes that the key beneficiaries are the immigrants themselves and not the native citizens.

Second, low-skilled immigrants, which represented nearly 50% of the total in 2012, were found to have a higher employment rates than low-skilled natives indicating that U.S. citizens are being displaced at least at the lower bound of the income spectrum.

Finally, first-generation immigrants were found to be more costly for entitlement programs than native-born citizens.
There is NO CASE to make for the net economic benefits of mass immigration, nor can the economic benefits of immigration even begin to compensate for the various societal costs of immigration. The only economic case for immigration is a tautology, which is because the definition of GDP means that GDP will increase with population growth, so any increase in population for any reason, up to and including alien invasion and occupation, will be "economically beneficial" so long as "beneficial" is defined as being "a larger GDP number".

This is not, in fact, the case. The natives are not better off economically, and they are definitely not better off in any other way.

Labels: ,

77 Comments:

Blogger Nate September 26, 2016 8:03 AM  

yes yes but see the economic study is flawed because it does not consider virtue signaling and feel good beneficial.

Anonymous johnc September 26, 2016 8:05 AM  

The companies that employ those immigrants are economically better off. And all the costs can be sloughed off to the general public.

Blogger Ben Cohen September 26, 2016 8:18 AM  

Sounds like free trade

Anonymous mature craig September 26, 2016 8:18 AM  

I like the idea of Trump building a wall. It will provide jobs and it sends a message that the country is serious about stopping illegal immigration.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) September 26, 2016 8:20 AM  


yes yes but see the economic study is flawed because it does not consider virtue signaling and feel good beneficial.


Easy fix, just figure out what the average annual dopamine increase is from the virtue signaling and feel goods, then figure out how much more medication would need to be purchased to achieve the same result.

Anonymous Mr. Deplorabional September 26, 2016 8:23 AM  

Good to see the spam-hammer coming down faster.

Anonymous hardscrabble farmer September 26, 2016 8:26 AM  

I'm just a farmer, but one thing I do know is that while diversity is incredibly important in thriving ecosystems, it must be managed. No pumpkin patch was improved by adding 15% thistle and 8% goldenrod. A herd of Angus beef cattle does not improve by mixing in Jerseys with it until you have a hybrid population.

The people who promote and accept the current paradigm are ignorant of Nature and reality or manipulating them for their own selfish ends.

Blogger Cecil Henry September 26, 2016 8:27 AM  

Meanwhile, the MSM can't even keep their narratives straight. They want more 'immigrants', but not YOU and yours. As always, the third world is never the problem.

Promoting White Genocide ……… with Global Warming. Way to go Daily Mail. What evil propaganda

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3804123/Want-stop-global-warming-STOP-having-babies-says-scientist.html

Want to stop global warming? Then STOP having babies, says academic

Anonymous Steve September 26, 2016 8:31 AM  

But what about the excellent ethnic restaurants? The kids in Rotherham can console themselves with a curry.

Checkmate, bigots!

Anonymous Big Bill September 26, 2016 8:35 AM  

Why do we have to keep paying for these reports? Barbara Jordan and her Congressional committee determined that wetbacks were reducing black folks wages way back in 1986. That was thirty years ago.

Anonymous It's 2015+1 September 26, 2016 8:36 AM  

Just wanted to mention that I've noticed it's easier to convince liberally minded people that immigration (at least in the Canadian style) is actually a negative and harmful thing - if you mention that we are stealing the best that country has to offer, and are in fact harming that country. With all of the foreign doctors that we let in, it's usually easy to show them how harmful our policies will be in the long-run if we keep taking the very people these countries require to thrive.

Blogger Nate September 26, 2016 8:36 AM  

"But what about the excellent ethnic restaurants?"

I swear to God... if this deportation thing interupts my access to cheap excellent chimichangas... I will set this whole country on fire.

Blogger bosscauser September 26, 2016 8:37 AM  

Cui bono? Not I. Not thee...
Why do it then? Follow the money... always follow the money!😚

Let's go #Trump and hurry!

Blogger FALPhil September 26, 2016 8:46 AM  

@6 I'm just a farmer, but one thing I do know is that while diversity is incredibly important in thriving ecosystems, it must be managed.

Civilization and ecosystems are two entirely different things and your analogy cannot hold up.

Empirical evidence alone overwhelmingly points to the displacement of low-skilled natives in favor of low-skilled aliens. I have often wondered why BLM hasn't taken on immigration. The number of black lives destroyed by trigger happy cops is minuscule to those destroyed by insane immigration policies.

Anonymous Mr. Deplorabional September 26, 2016 8:48 AM  

Step 1:  Tie climate change to population growth.

Step 2:  Promote 1-child and no-child policies for the most rapidly-growing and -developing parts of the world.  This is the "third world".

Step 3:  Attract howls of "racist!" from all the leftards, and denunciation of climate science from same.

Step 4:  Climate science becomes respectable on the political right.  Solve climate problem with nuclear energy, solve the third-world population crisis with a cutoff of food and medical aid.

Anonymous Steve September 26, 2016 8:52 AM  

Nate - No way Jose.

In the Trumpenreich you will only be allowed to eat hamburgers with American cheese at Howard Johnson's.

Furthermore, you Johnny Rebs need taught a lesson, so Piggly Wiggly and Harris Teeter will henceforward be known as Wegmans.

Anonymous Hrw-500 September 26, 2016 8:55 AM  

#8 Cecil Henry
"Want to stop global warming? Then STOP having babies, says academic"

We did our part as well as China (who stepped back once they discovered then their population aged more faster then they expected and they want to avoid the same fate as Japan) but the immigrants and "refugees" should do as well.

Anonymous BGKB September 26, 2016 8:55 AM  

I have often wondered why BLM hasn't taken on immigration. The number of black lives destroyed by trigger happy cops

Soros pays their bills. The same reason you will never see a story of a gay wanting the HIV travel ban reinstated to slow the spread of Drug Resistant AIDS that when it goes from the refugees to the bathhouses will bring the 80s back.

so Piggly Wiggly and Harris Teeter will henceforward be known as Wegmans.

Piggly Wiggly needs to stick around until no living moslems exist in the US.

OT: Someone tell the national parks they found a niggerette that likes hiking so much she did so after being permanently disabled by a city street. She could be their spokesow
http://nypost.com/2016/09/26/al-sharptons-daughter-sues-city-over-foot-injury-she-hiked-with/

Blogger pyrrhus September 26, 2016 8:59 AM  

O/T These people never quit...(((Josh Levin))) of Slate wants whites out of baseball, replaced by 'roided up hispanics...

Blogger pyrrhus September 26, 2016 9:07 AM  

@14 Since none of the third world countries can feed itself, cut off food and other foreign aid, and the population will revert to historical levels...as long as US politicians don't let them come here....

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 26, 2016 9:14 AM  

Yeah, but whites are such losers though. We can't give jobs to unemployed losers, if they weren't losers they'd already have these jobs.

Anonymous CC September 26, 2016 9:17 AM  

Cecil Henry wrote:
Want to stop global warming? Then STOP having babies, says academic


Looking up the guy who wrote that his name is Travis Rieder and I can't tell what is background is but he worked as a Hecht-Levi Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Berman Institute in John Hopkins University. Obviously that isn't proof of anything, but that whole article comes across as extremely defensive:

Some comments – those claiming climate change is a hoax, devised by those who wish to control the world's resources – are not worth responding to.

Since 97 percent of all relevant experts cannot convince climate change skeptics of the basic scientific facts, then nothing I say will change their minds.

I'll conclude with one, final thought: I don't enjoy arguing for a small family ethic, or a population engineering scheme.

Despite snide accusations to the contrary, I get no research funds or any other incentive for making this case.


Tells me that more and more people aren't buying what he and his "97%" are selling anymore.

Blogger Cecil Henry September 26, 2016 9:18 AM  

@16:

China has 1.5 billion people. Overcrowded, and growing, and no one child policy, and multiple colonies.

NO they have done nothing. The Daily Mail propaganda is aimed at one target--- Whites.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 26, 2016 9:19 AM  

FALPhil wrote:@6Empirical evidence alone overwhelmingly points to the displacement of low-skilled natives in favor of low-skilled aliens. I have often wondered why BLM hasn't taken on immigration.

Because BLM is no-skill natives.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 26, 2016 9:21 AM  

Cecil Henry wrote:@16:

China has 1.5 billion people. Overcrowded, and growing, and no one child policy, and multiple colonies.

NO they have done nothing. The Daily Mail propaganda is aimed at one target--- Whites.


It may be time to sperg out on documenting this ethnic cleansing.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 26, 2016 9:22 AM  

because the definition of GDP means that GDP will increase with population growth

The purpose behind creating economic metrics is to justify political policies.

Blogger bob k. mando September 26, 2016 9:23 AM  

VD
which is because the definition of GDP means that GDP will increase with population growth,



if i'm not mistaken, you have slightly transposed that.

the CBO/Congress use 'population growth' ( as well as APR inflation and some other factors ) to benchmark year-over-year growth in the Federal budget ( G ). this is why the current benchmark for growth in G is ~7%.

this do NOT necessarily transform into growth in the overall GDP.

in fact, due to the Federal Reserve enacting policy designed to constrain GDP to ~2% (and certainly no more than 3% ), C ( Consumer Spending ) and I ( Business Investment ) are being crushed in order to hold GDP down to the FedRes goal while the CBO maintains 7% growth in budget.

Ex-Im also plays into this, of course.

Anonymous GREG NIKOLIC September 26, 2016 9:25 AM  

(Sep 26) Toronto — DTAH Architects, of 50 Park Road, Rosedale, offered today to give Trump “the snazziest wall he will ever behold” complete with “[bloody] sacrifices of Toronto virgins” even before Donald J. Trump’s projected crushing victory over a sickly-looking and hysterically strident Hillary Clinton in the presidential debate in New York Monday night, Trump’s home ground.

“At first we were skeptical,” DTAH’s lead project manager told Sorcerygod, “not only of Trump himself, but of his apparently racist policies. They seemed beyond the pale. But once we saw which way the American-Superpower-wind was blowing, we grinned in a friendly way and jumped smartly on the Trump White House bandwagon.”

A dismayed minority of DTAH staffers vowed to balk at doing any of American Trump’s “dirty work,” avoiding helping the former reality-TV host and present businessman with the Mexican wall, Muslim screening, or any other of his pet projects. However, when the Canadians were informed that any who refused DTAH company policy would be pink-slipped without severance pay at all — plus additionally given a permanent bad reference on their resume, with possible architecture-field blacklisting, a cheerful unanimity suddenly emerged. [. . . continued . . .]

-- rest of this important news article at www.eliteavenue.wordpress.com

Blogger seeingsights September 26, 2016 9:25 AM  

The 9-11 attacks--done by immigrants--wiped out at least 30 years of whatever benefits gained by immigration.

Blogger Cataline Sergius September 26, 2016 9:31 AM  

For the whole "Nation of Immigrants" thing to be even a notional success you need the right kind of immigrant.

Someone who's goal is get here and get on the government tit is NOT that kind of immigrant.

You can't get the right kind anymore. When getting to America meant risking death on a months long ocean voyage, having no hope of returning home and having little or nothing in the way of survival when they finally got here...that is the right kind of immigrant and the world can't produce them anymore.

Anonymous EH September 26, 2016 9:33 AM  

It is not enough to stop non-White immigration, nor to expel the illegals, nor to revoke the visas and work permits of those aliens currently in the US -- those who were naturalized as citizens over the past 50 years must also be expelled, as well as all those who were born in the US without a US citizen parent, those with dual citizenship and those who are by ancestry automatically eligible for foreign citizenship. This will require massive changes in law and legal interpretation that will have to be backed by organized force. All US legislatures will need to be subjugated. The whole legal code, rules of procedure and controlling case law will have to be replaced. Existing judges will have to be removed or intimidated to a degree even Roosevelt could only have dreamed of. The mass media ownership and personalities will have to be completely replaced. The professoriat will have to be purged. The whole banking and financial system will have to be torn down and rebuilt without any of its current executives. The federal and state bureaucracies will have to be thoroughly broken to the will of the native White American population.

Those are the objectives. How will we achieve them?

Blogger Mocheirge September 26, 2016 9:40 AM  

Big Bill wrote:Why do we have to keep paying for these reports? Barbara Jordan and her Congressional committee determined that wetbacks were reducing black folks wages way back in 1986. That was thirty years ago.

We will continue to pay for these reports until one of them produces the "correct" result. That immigration harms wages is not "correct".

Blogger Salt September 26, 2016 9:49 AM  

Obama said one of his goals was to fundamentally change America, alter its fabric. Given the economic destruction taking place, it's evident such is not a consideration in that plan.

Anonymous BGKB September 26, 2016 9:49 AM  

Also the Jewish outmarriage rate in the US is 71%

Lots of jews go gay to avoid jewish women.

Reading the comments leads me to believe that the hills of Vox Popoli are thick with Jews in disguise.

A bagel behind every blade of grass.

There is no Alt White or Alt West. Those terms are thrown out by Vox and only Vox - no one else uses them.

HilLIARy would have said them but she was too busy coughing.

Anonymous Onlooker September 26, 2016 9:53 AM  

Mocheirge wrote:We will continue to pay for these reports until one of them produces the "correct" result. That immigration harms wages is not "correct".

Yep. That's the game. They only need on or two to back their play. Then the media takes care of the rest of the dirty deed. See: all of economics.

Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 9:53 AM  

@13 I have often wondered why BLM hasn't taken on immigration.

Blacks shoot each other down in the ghetto that the majority must surely know that the killers are other blacks. BLM is a passion driven anti cop anti white movement and largely disinterested in the welfare of blacks. They are just venting against people they don't like. It is a Black Lives (don't) Matter sort of thing.

Blogger Hector Henry September 26, 2016 9:56 AM  

So being Alt Right needs to be a bridge to being pro-White.

In fact, that's exactly what it is! It may happen faster than we think.

Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 9:56 AM  

The unspoken background bias for all this stuff is the one-world can't we all just get along fantasy. They can't admit that any one group won't fit in without throwing out the whole model, and so we get what? Samalis and bomb throwing Arabs.

Anonymous 11B September 26, 2016 10:09 AM  

I imagine these researchers were probably under great pressure to put immigration in a positive light. Therefore, if the best they could do was to conclude immigration is a wash, it must really be a big negative.

Blogger bulbasaur September 26, 2016 10:17 AM  

New immigrants will inevitably dilute the dividend (e.g., public goods and social benefits) and voting rights of the existing citizen-shareholders, so they must compensate for the dilution by bringing in new equity, e.g., highly desired skills. However, from an ethnic perspective, it is obvious that large and ethnically distinct immigrant groups will form voting blocs against current citizen-shareholders, so any mass immigration will practically always be net-negative equity from the perspective of current shareholder-citizens, regardless of how many doctors and engineers (or terrorists, for that matter) are obtained in the process.

Quite frankly, mass immigration is so obviously treasonous that the only reason why it isn't explicitly banned in constitutions is that such a vile form of treason probably did not even occur to lawmakers. Still I bet most nation states throughout history have implicitly understood that 1) people have a right to maintain their ethnic compositions and 2) their rulers have a duty to do so. It is only through decades of gaslighting propaganda that this implicit understanding has been eroded.

Blogger residentMoron September 26, 2016 10:20 AM  

"... a group of the nation's "smartest" professors from the most elite schools in the country recently came together to publish a 500-page study for the "National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine" on the economic and fiscal impacts of immigration."

It has to be said:

I fucking LOVE Science!

Anonymous Bob Just September 26, 2016 10:24 AM  

@13 FALPhil (from TFL, GT, THR?)

The analogy could hold if you go further into what Civilization and Ecosystems are made up of:

Participants - communication - etc.

Ex.
Some plants will release chemicals (ask David the Good) to deter harmful competitors (allelopathic) and attract certain others that are beneficial. One might say this as a type of immigration/invasion control.

@6 I do have to agree with FALPhil that your example might not be correct.

If adding the thistle and goldenrod to your pumpkin patch remediated heavy metals from the soil, would that not constitute an improvement?

Likewise, if the thistle and goldenrod are in the patch- they will compete with the pumpkins for resources, and the yield might decrease.

However, what if the thistle deters herbivory and the goldenrod deters insect pests - then, you may see an increase in yield pumpkin production (even on a diminished area).

Some folks have even examined this type of behavior in the context of game theory.

The rise and fall of civilizations seems to me similar in certain ways to succession in forests

http://www.edibleforestgardens.com/about_gardening



Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 10:27 AM  

@39

A couple fine points.

Dilute the shareholders is exactly right. Plus the voting block thing will cause the political class to play one group against the others, as they currently do with success with the blacks. Nuts to importing large numbers of ethnic minorities. I dilutes benefits and corrupts society at the same time. Good (useful) immigrants in small numbers is fine. But the people we are currently bringing in? And in large numbers?

When they first formed the United States the world was dominated by a few predatory European countries. The fear was that the collective former colonies were not strong enough to avoid foreign involvement. The solution was to let a lot of people in order to settle the Ohio River valley, bring the new people into the fold, and have a stronger union. But of course that was back when we took our own self interest in mind and the political class still had a little honor.

Blogger Escoffier September 26, 2016 10:28 AM  

johnc wrote:The companies that employ those immigrants are economically better off. And all the costs can be sloughed off to the general public.


This is such an article of faith but I'm skeptical. I was at ground zero managing a hot dog joint in Chicago when the 86 amnesty dropped. The place I worked started hiring illegals against my strenuous objections so I saw firsthand. All they saved was a couple of bucks, it really wasn't much. And the illegals just brought new and interesting problems with them like the kid who slashed a customer with a knife because he reached over the sneeze guard to point at something. That was new.

So my question is this: do we know businesses save money hiring illegals, and related, if they do how much do they save.

Obviously if you take into the account their dumping their costs on the rest of us we are paying for it either way but it's always bugged me that blithe assertion that businesses are saving beaucoup bucks by hiring illegals.

Can anyone drop some F'in knowledge on me here?

Blogger pyrrhus September 26, 2016 10:29 AM  

@26 GDP (which is fictional anyway) doesn't matter...It's GDP/capita that matters. Luxembourg has a tiny GDP, but far higher GDP/capita than the US...

Anonymous dB September 26, 2016 10:32 AM  

@7, @21

Can you tell me what that is in the picture?

http://johnshopkins.academia.edu/TravisRieder

Can't even follow his own narrative very well.

Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 10:34 AM  

In some cases it is wildly obvious that these studies are done for the sake of giving the political class talking points. In law they find expert witnesses who are know to reliably testify this way or that, and such people get steady employment testifying. I would imagine it is the same with studies. Sacrifice your integrity as little as possible while still giving the political class a version of what it wants. A lot of what passes for expertise and "science" is just agenda promotion.

My pet term for this stuff is outcome based logic. The desired outcome is known and logic is pressed into service to justify it.

Blogger Cataline Sergius September 26, 2016 10:39 AM  

I have often wondered why BLM hasn't taken on immigration.

70% of the rioters in Charlotted were found to have out of state IDs.

BLM has nothing at all to do with Black lives.

It's just an undisciplined street army but someone named Soros is footing the bill for them.

BLM does serve the very important purpose to directing Blacks very justifiable anger completely in the opposite direction of the people who have fucked them over the hardest.

Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 10:41 AM  

@43 Going by first had observation where I live, companies can pick up somewhat better help for the same price with immigrants. Low cost American help tends to be people with issues. The savings are small, but companies run on the margin and small savings can produce a big difference in profits. Of course it requires deliberate ignorance not to notice that it employment goes down for the locals. And the same quality help can be had locally for a little more money.

The "jobs Americans won't do" pisses me off a lot if I pause to notice the comment. I dislike being lied to.

Blogger residentMoron September 26, 2016 10:42 AM  

Another Aamish fanatic has run amok in a Texas mall. Six wounded, apparently the assailant (PBUH) has been shot dead by police.

Blogger Escoffier September 26, 2016 10:43 AM  

Something that undergirds this whole argument of 'needing' immigrants is the panic that population x isn't having enough babies or growing fast enough, but growing fast enough for what?

Populations are organic entities and all such things tend to wax and wane for various reasons. It has struck me that this notion of endless growth unmoored by any other considerations is really only seen in one form of life. Cancer.

Don't populations have a right to shrink if they so choose? Who are our leaders to tell us have babies or we'll import existential threats to you?

And of course the answer is because greedy short sighted politicians squandered spent and stole things like pension moneys and now were trapped in a bizarre pyramid scheme waiting for the bottom to fall out.

Anonymous johnc September 26, 2016 10:43 AM  

So my question is this: do we know businesses save money hiring illegals

Yes. Because if they weren't they wouldn't be bringing them in by the truckloads.

OpenID basementhomebrewer September 26, 2016 10:46 AM  

Escoffier wrote:Something that undergirds this whole argument of 'needing' immigrants is the panic that population x isn't having enough babies or growing fast enough, but growing fast enough for what?

Populations are organic entities and all such things tend to wax and wane for various reasons. It has struck me that this notion of endless growth unmoored by any other considerations is really only seen in one form of life. Cancer.

Don't populations have a right to shrink if they so choose? Who are our leaders to tell us have babies or we'll import existential threats to you?

And of course the answer is because greedy short sighted politicians squandered spent and stole things like pension moneys and now were trapped in a bizarre pyramid scheme waiting for the bottom to fall out.


But as Vox has pointed out. They per capita GDP is actually shrinking, which means more people are likely to be net takers from the pyramid scheme. They have inadvertently accelerated the collapse and simultaneously made the fallout from that collapse much worse due to the increased number and size of tribes in the nation.

Blogger kurt9 September 26, 2016 10:50 AM  

a group of the nation's "smartest" professors from the most elite schools in the country recently came together to publish a 500-page study for the "National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine" on the economic and fiscal impacts of immigration. After what must have been countless months of research, the report seems to confirm what most people could have derived from applying simple logic, namely that while immigration expands the economy it also negatively impacts the employment of low-skilled native workers and places undue burden on federal and state entitlements like food assistance programs and Medicaid.

So our eyes are not lying to us after all.

Anonymous johnc September 26, 2016 10:50 AM  

Something that undergirds this whole argument of 'needing' immigrants is the panic that population x isn't having enough babies or growing fast enough, but growing fast enough for what?

Fast enough for replacement at least? Because I don't know of many white countries that have even that level except maybe some areas in Eastern Europe.

Who are our leaders to tell us have babies or we'll import existential threats to you?

Ohh don't worry, it's not the leaders doing that. The browning of the West is God's punishment on His people for violating the natural law for decades. Because as He told us since time immemorial, the marital act must remain open to procreation. This generation is not suddenly exempt from the moral law.

Anonymous mature craig September 26, 2016 10:58 AM  

It has struck me that this notion of endless growth unmoored by any other consideration is really only seen in one other form of lifr.Cancer. wow well put I am struck by that too. Perhaps some great persuasive talking point narratives can come from that rich observation u made

Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 11:02 AM  

The real underlying problem is that the post WWII or 1960's culture is unsound. It amounts to individual self indulgence at the expense of society at large. Raising kids is expensive and it was accomplished by traditional cultural norms that pressured men into marriage and women into reproduction. That oppressive culture is now gone and the bill is coming due. Turns out it wasn't such a hot idea after all.

The dopiest thing is this sustainable talk. Sustainable this and sustainable that from people who live in a culture that is not sustainable.

Blogger Chris Mallory September 26, 2016 11:11 AM  

"The solution was to let a lot of people in order to settle the Ohio River valley, bring the new people into the fold, and have a stronger union."

Wrong, wrong, wrong. There was very little immigration to the US between 1790 and 1840. The Ohio River Valley was settled and the territories had achieved statehood by then, Kentucky in 1792, Ohio in 1803, Indiana in 1816, and Illinois in 1818. In 1829, there were only 8,000 immigrants. In 1830, the number was only 23,000. Hardly "large numbers" when you consider that in 1820 there were already 10 million people in the nation.

Blogger Chris Mallory September 26, 2016 11:21 AM  

johnc wrote:The browning of the West is God's punishment on His people for violating the natural law for decades. Because as He told us since time immemorial, the marital act must remain open to procreation.

Book, Chapter and verse(s) please.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 26, 2016 11:23 AM  

johnc wrote:The companies that employ those immigrants are economically better off. And all the costs can be sloughed off to the general public.



Tell that to the nursing home I worked at that replaced all the white workers with Liberians.

Blogger pyrrhus September 26, 2016 11:25 AM  

In some cases it is wildly obvious that these studies are done for the sake of giving the political class talking points. In law they find expert witnesses who are know to reliably testify this way or that, and such people get steady employment testifying. I would imagine it is the same with studies. Sacrifice your integrity as little as possible while still giving the political class a version of what it wants. A lot of what passes for expertise and "science" is just agenda promotion.

Yep. When I was trying a case with several experienced attorneys, after a particularly ridiculous piece of "expert" testimony, the consensus was that you could find an expert to testify that the moon was made of green cheese in less than 48 hours....

Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 11:26 AM  

@54 If you want to keep your country, or your political system, or your race, or your religion, or your whatever; reproduction is necessary because the world is a predatory place. Fail to sustain population numbers and in time the neighbors will be running things. If they don't adjust to the situation in Europe we will get to watch population in real time and it won't be nice for the locals. Here also, although I think it is a slower process.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 26, 2016 11:28 AM  

Looking back, I see they're under new management again. Fourth manager (at least) in two years. They change everything except the singular HR troll who's desperately trying to destroy the place.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 26, 2016 11:31 AM  

bulbasaur wrote:Quite frankly, mass immigration is so obviously treasonous that the only reason why it isn't explicitly banned in constitutions is that such a vile form of treason probably did not even occur to lawmakers.

This is true, but it bears saying that every waning empire's aristocracy has committed this exact form of treason.

Anonymous VFM #6306 September 26, 2016 11:36 AM  

Immigrants might be useful to jobs like firefighting equipment measuring because you would never have to put up with the expense of firing them when there are inventory shortages. Science proves that immigrants are neither water soluble nor flame retardant.

Thus, it is inevitable that we develop an economy based on the principle of...no weigh hose A.

Anonymous Edjamacator September 26, 2016 11:39 AM  

hardscrabble farmer wrote:I'm just a farmer...

"Just."

Anonymous Jack Amok September 26, 2016 12:07 PM  

So my question is this: do we know businesses save money hiring illegals, and related, if they do how much do they save.

15.5% social security, 15% income tax, plus any state taxes, and whatever L&I tax there is...

And they're less likely to file an employment lawsuit, though I suspect that benefit is coming to an end as the pro-migrant crowd overplays its hand.

In the short run, illegals do save a business money. In the long run, or even the medium run, they destroy it, but if there's already an income stream, the managers of the business can siphon off a little more money before bailing if they hire illegals.

Blogger Escoffier September 26, 2016 12:12 PM  

Mocheirge wrote:Big Bill wrote:Why do we have to keep paying for these reports? Barbara Jordan and her Congressional committee determined that wetbacks were reducing black folks wages way back in 1986. That was thirty years ago.

We will continue to pay for these reports until one of them produces the "correct" result. That immigration harms wages is not "correct".


No shit! George Borgas has been tearing this up for what? 20 years? I've never heard anyone even make an intelligent rebuttal. If you rub Borgas and Putnam together I think the border wall appears magically.

Blogger Basil Makedon September 26, 2016 12:27 PM  

Medium and long term hiring illegals is a bad decision for a business, but to get there to have those problems you must survive in the short term. If business had any reasonable belief that the existing laws would be enforced and enforced evenly, then the short term wouldn't be a problem either. Every business would have an even playing field (at least in this respect).

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 26, 2016 1:10 PM  

Aeoli Pera wrote:Yeah, but whites are such losers though. We can't give jobs to unemployed losers, if they weren't losers they'd already have these jobs.
I see Kevin Williamson has arrived. Time to get this party started.

Blogger EscapeVelocity September 26, 2016 2:51 PM  

Mass immigration is a transfer of wealth from the lower class to the upper class/elites.

It benefits some to the detriment of the powerless...as Jewess Jennifer Rubin will sneer at the goy from the pages of WaPo.

Blogger Johnny September 26, 2016 2:52 PM  

A local small time employer hired illegals. The Hispanic would show up with a fake SSN, the boss would file the papers, and the guy would work for maybe up to a year. Then the gov would declare the number fake, the boss would tell the employee he had to let him go. And then as though by magic another Hispanic would show up in need of work, and so on for years.

Anonymous Eric the Red September 26, 2016 3:33 PM  

"low-skilled immigrants, which represented nearly 50% of the total in 2012, were found to have a higher employment rates than low-skilled natives indicating that U.S. citizens are being displaced at least at the lower bound of the income spectrum."

This is rich... employers will not only hire illegals, but then having broken the law by the mere fact of hiring them, can then break even more laws by ignoring regulations on insurance, overtime, safety, etc. etc. etc. It's a wonderful break-all-the-laws-at-the-same-time package tied up in a big bow for the employers, and they gleefully accept it like it was Christmas every day.

Anonymous Onlooker September 26, 2016 3:48 PM  

11B wrote:I imagine these researchers were probably under great pressure to put immigration in a positive light. Therefore, if the best they could do was to conclude immigration is a wash, it must really be a big negative.

Bingo

Anonymous Mr. Deplorabional September 26, 2016 4:28 PM  

greenhorse wrote:This is the same magical thinking that is used to justify calling crippled people "handicapable" and negroes "blacks", then "Afro-Americans", then "African-Americans". It is the belief that an object or a concept is intrinsically altered by the label.

Progs change labels because they want to change the way people perceive things.

Which observably doesn't work; the new label acquires the connotations of its object, e.g. "that is SO gay."

Doesn't stop them from corrupting the language in the process.  What Millennial doesn't require a comprehensive explanation of what "the gay '90's" means to understand it properly?

@63  You bastard.  You owe me a new keyboard, but I'll take it in beer if we ever meet (and buy the next round).

Anonymous JAG September 26, 2016 5:00 PM  

Meanwhile, the MSM can't even keep their narratives straight. They want more 'immigrants', but not YOU and yours. As always, the third world is never the problem.

Promoting White Genocide ……… with Global Warming. Way to go Daily Mail. What evil propaganda



Want to stop global warming? Then STOP having babies, says academic


Yep. They tell us how we need to stop procreating, then turn right around and tell us we need more savages from the 3rd world because we aren't breeding enough.

And they think we don't see through this shit.

Anonymous Post Alley Crackpot September 26, 2016 8:34 PM  

oh, hai people of the left, we've got all of the restaurant diversity we need, you can stop now with that shit, kthxbai ...

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts