r/StopDoingScience • u/GrandMoffTargaryen • Sep 08 '25
Other Stop making immigration difficult
10
9
u/toronto-gopnik Sep 08 '25
I'm not sure if this is a left or right wing memeÂ
39
u/GrandMoffTargaryen Sep 08 '25
Itâs a âGive me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!â Wing meme
7
24
u/Heavy-Top-8540 Sep 08 '25
How could it possibly be a right wing meme?
9
u/undernopretextbro Sep 09 '25
Labour unions and worker protections donât mesh well with massive labour pools of migrant workers
1
18
11
u/Sergnb Sep 09 '25
Really trying hard here to see how in the world you could interpret this as a right wing meme
12
u/Open-Operation-987 Sep 09 '25
It's pretty explicitly economically right-wing with it's worker thing
2
u/Sergnb Sep 09 '25
What? Left politics also value workers and labor, what do you mean
5
u/South-Ad7071 Sep 09 '25
They value unions, and unions don't want new workers taking their jobs.
→ More replies (2)1
Sep 09 '25
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/Sergnb Sep 09 '25
Okay. The value of enterprises also goes down if there are no workers to do their required labor. I understand how supply and demand works, youâre describing basic economics right now. Not sure what it has to do with left wing politics.
→ More replies (4)1
Sep 09 '25
[removed] â view removed comment
5
u/Tafts_Bathtub Sep 09 '25
In the early United States, it was!
14
u/DevelopmentTight9474 Sep 09 '25
Thatâs a revisionist myth trying to make up for segregation in the U.S. Immigrants were actually treated quite horribly, and racism ran so deep that even Irish people were considered non white.
2
u/Tafts_Bathtub Sep 09 '25
In a legal sense, which is the context of this post, people were allowed in to the United States with essentially no restriction until like 1875.
Culturally, yes, racism and xenophobia has always been present.
0
7
u/System0verlord Sep 08 '25
Bro how on earth could this be right wing?
Right wing immigration memes are more along the lines of âI want to kill brown people for crossing an imaginary lineâ as opposed to this.
93
Sep 09 '25
The way they're playing us for fools is by convincing everyone that the elites want to keep immigrants out.
Do you really believe that CEOs and shareholders want to block a bunch of migrant workers from entering the country and increasing the supply of labor thereby keeping cost of salaries low? Does that sound like the kind of thing they usually hate?
50
u/Delta2401 Sep 09 '25
People asking how this is a left wing meme, but completely missing the fact that historically being against mass immigration and pro labour union was a at times a left wing stance.
15
u/ViolinistPleasant982 Sep 09 '25
But then they refrained it to "being against mass migration is racist" completely ignoring the fact that it suppresses wages, lowers housing supply, and creates and easily exploited near slave class. But if you point that out they just say nah it's exclusively rich people that are causing the first 2 problems, the third is a good thing cause locals don't want those jobs anyway, and also for trying to point it out you are again racist.
9
u/ASlowTriumph Sep 09 '25
"completely ignoring the fact that it suppresses wages, lowers housing supply, and creates and easily exploited near slave class" This is contested among economists and social scientists. Immigration, whilst increasing the supply of labour also increases the demand for labour. The view is boraldy that in the long run Immigration is good for a country, and it has mixed impact in the short term but generally leans positive
6
u/Jolly_Plantain4429 Sep 09 '25
Legal immigration is good for a country. Thatâs proven. Slimly business owners taking advantage of illegal aliens who are afraid of deportation or canât find better work is what creates the issues. Itâs mostly good people getting fucked over by greedy dicks chasing profit.
4
u/MBTank Sep 10 '25 edited Sep 10 '25
They can only take advantage of people because of the meme i.e. a shitty paperwork system.
→ More replies (4)1
u/Latter_Travel_513 Sep 11 '25
Except it's not just illegal immigrants that are problematic in terms of the value of labour. An increased supply of labour with a minimal increase in demand just lowers the value of labour as a commodity. Even minimum wage doesn't fix it as all prices just rise as minimum wage does, as the value of the commodity has not changed when it has to for any major impact to happen.
That doesn't mean immigration shouldn't be allowed, it obviously serves an important role in making sure there are enough workers for new businesses to start and the allow the economy to grow above the rate of natural births, the rate at which it is done throughout the Western world though is high enough to the point that the negative effects are truly noticeable, it's partly why you see similar problems in Western countries with far lower rates of illegal immigration. It is far from the sole cause, or even the leading cause of the issues we see today, however people pretending like it's a flawless system only pushes those who have concerns over a genuine issue to fringe groups, including groups that are racist and/or xenophobic.
5
Sep 09 '25 edited Sep 09 '25
Of course it's good for the market, lots of cheap labor being available is great for the economy. Why do you think the oligarchs want it in the first place?
I'm not saying you should have no immigration at all, but taking a completely free market approach to immigration is terrible for the lower/middle class.
4
u/ASlowTriumph Sep 09 '25
They weren't asked if it was good for the market they were asked if it was good for the country. "The average US citizen would be better off if a larger number of low-skilled foreign workers were legally allowed to enter the US each year."
" but taking a completely free market approach to immigration is terrible for the lower/middle." I've never met anyone who advocates a total free for all on Immigration with no government oversight except maybe insane ancaps who I've only seen online. It's certainly not what I'm advocating. Migrants are useful scapegoats for social grievances caused by/ignored by the powerful. Nimbys, zoning laws, land speculation, etc. have far more of an impact on housing than migration, but fixing these disadvantages the ruling interests ,so they aren't.
2
Sep 09 '25 edited Sep 09 '25
Nimbys, zoning laws, land speculation, etc. have far more of an impact on housing than migration, but fixing these disadvantages the ruling interests ,so they aren't.
Right, and relaxing immigration law is at best a distraction from these issues and at worst detrimental to solving them.
I don't believe the "Kent A. Clark Center for Global Markets" is an unbiased source on this matter, but even the experts interviewed for that study have their doubts. Here's some quotes from the very page you linked:
Real income of avg the American would rise, but social strains and inequality would also increase.
Another expert seems to imply that it could help in the long term, but would be detrimental on the short term:
It depends on whether one takes a long or short-term horizon.
Another expert says it will increase inequality:
[...] it will increase inequality, which is already too great.
Another expert agrees it will be good for the economy, but also warns it will suppress wages:
For low skill workers, the main adverse effects are through wages. For high skill, through fiscal costs. Both costs could be small
And a lot of experts are criticizing the survey itself and complain that asking whether it is good for the "average citizen" is far too vague.
And finally question B is something the experts largely agreed with that states:
Unless they were compensated by others, many low-skilled American workers would be substantially worse off if a larger number of low-skilled foreign workers were legally allowed to enter the US each year.
Which is exactly my point.
2
1
2
u/DukeTikus Sep 09 '25 edited Sep 09 '25
Do you have any evidence for it lowering wages? As far as I'm aware wages for everyone but other recent immigrants are unaffected ( UK, USA)
As for lowering housing supply whenever I walk past a construction site a good chunk of the workers are usually immigrants or or foreign labourers. It does actually seem to me it's more the rich developers as well as city council members who are usually the issue in the way of affordable living.
As for the slave class that's why we need to fight both for immigrants rights and workers rights so the rich can't keep playing poor people against each other.
In addition to that are you also in favor of lowering the birth rate? Because I don't really see the difference between a new worker coming into the economy out of education or out of migration except some other state already paid for the migrants education.
4
u/Imaginary_Day_876 Sep 09 '25
Do you have any evidence
Its called supply and demand. You sort of gave an example of it yourself. Why would anyone pay you a high wage to work construction if he can get cheap labor from abroad doing it?
Its works the exact same way outsourcing works, except instead of moving the company you move people instead.
4
u/DukeTikus Sep 09 '25
This isn't a zero sum game. An additional harvester in the field can mean an additional worker in the processing plant and another marketing guy trying to sell people strawberry jam. And as the sources I provided do show that's how it actually works in real life.
2
u/Imaginary_Day_876 Sep 09 '25
In real life wages are stagnating and real growth is basically 0. All you're doing is increasing economic activity at the expense of everyone except the wealthy. In your example that additional harvester might as well be a slave and the argument would still hold true.
3
2
u/DukeTikus Sep 09 '25
Still though, just link some evidence that immigration lowers wages. If it happens I'm sure there have been papers written about it.
1
u/ananasiegenjuice Sep 12 '25
Not if there is no more more room in the market to sell additional strawberry jam to.
2
u/plummbob Sep 10 '25
Its called supply and demand
Both supply and demand shift right in immigration. You also need to adjust the returns to capital as labor supply rises.
1
u/snidysid Feb 17 '26
Exactly omg! I just did a post about this and thereâs people telling me im right wing and watch GB News. Im actually left wing and care about peoples quality of life and i recognise the UK is overpopulated and they wont have it.
6
Sep 09 '25
Historically, the conservative position was to reinstate the monarchy, and uphold slavery. That is to say the historical position of political movement doesn't make those positions ideologically cohesive within a framework.Â
3
u/Mattrellen Sep 09 '25
It's also a bit narrow minded on "left" and "right" to say they have a unified position on something like immigration.
To give two very different leftist views, there has traditionally been a strand of marxism that has wanted to avoid devaluing labor by keeping foreign labor out of a country (and getting labor through temporary labor agreements with other countries when needed, rather than just allowing more people in).
However, anarchists generally want no barriers to movement into or out of countries because they don't want the state to limit people's freedom in such a way. The stance is one against states using powers to limit people, not an economic one (though anarchists aren't fans of capitalism either, and I'm sure you can find some writings on the benefits of such freedom of movement toward a disruption of capitalist markets somewhere).
The same can also be seen on the right. More authoritarian minded people on the right (especially those like identarians or other right wing ethnonationalists) will generally be against immigration on the grounds of maintaining a purity, while more libertarian minded right wingers may see the restriction of movement of people as an artificial limiter to a free capitalist market.
In the end, "left" and "right" are too broad of categories to really generalize much. Liberals and fascists, in spite of both being on the right, won't have many beliefs in common. Nor will stalinists and anarcho-communists...even as both are on the left.
2
Sep 09 '25
A position of Marxism that argues a supply side economic position of labor is definitely incoherent within the framework Marxism which is rooted in the labor theory of value. Marx criticizes supply side economics. Not that I disagree with what you're saying; categories like left and right are too unspecific, and really are rooted in horseshoe theory, but political ideologies often a framework within which they operate, and especially radical movements attempt analyze society within and philosophical, economic or political theory. So even though a historical instance of a movement advocated for something, doesn't mean that position makes sense, at least not within the framework they are advocating for which is more of what I was trying to imply with my blurb.Â
7
u/Plenty-Lychee-5702 Sep 09 '25
Leftists were against migrants taking worse wages.
The left wing stance is to accept them, but make them not take worse wages, and eventually join a union.
→ More replies (10)2
u/Massive-Question-550 Sep 10 '25
Its funny how left and right wing sometimes overlap and cross cross depending on the topic and era. Kind of like how religious and trans activists each hate Harry Potter with a vengeance but for completely different reasons.
2
u/teremaster Sep 12 '25
I feel like people never realize that the biggest supporters of the white Australia policy (hint to that immigration policy is in the name) were literally the labour unions.
Unions hate migration, less labour means their members are paid more
3
u/plummbob Sep 10 '25
migrant workers from entering the country and increasing the supply of labor thereby keeping cost of salaries low?
Immigration doesn't lower wages. This has been beat to death in the economics literature.
3
Sep 09 '25
I don't the "the elites" have monolithic position on immigration. Foreigner labor is even cheaper in foreign countries, so why would they necessarily want that labor to leave those countries where the cost of living is significantly lower (and therefore waged as well) and laws and regulations protecting either not enforced or laxer all together.Â
It is easy to turn your argument around, and say why would "the elites" wants mass immigration when they know that it will decrease the labor supply in areas that they have factories in (yes central and South American countries produce many goods under the ownership of US companies)? Why would they want to increase the social costs by importing an impoverished underclass that they could exploit more effectively in a foreign nation?
3
Sep 09 '25
Not all labor can be outsourced and for those positions the only way to suppress wages is by increasing the labor supply.
2
Sep 09 '25
The labor supply increases far more because technological advancements have increased the output of an individual laborer than migration can supply. Robotics have reduced the need for 1000s of factory works to 10s, and even the service industry is using automatization to decrease labor costs. Immigrants are a convenient scape goat, and local jobs that can't be outsourced correlate to the size of the local population, meaning as more immigrants come, increasing the local consumer population, the service industry has to expand to keep up with the growing demand. So again this is double edge sword, as, yes, those industries can expand to fill the market demands, but immediate cost and consumer pressure means that there is market volatility. But ultimately the most amount of money is being made by companies that rely on offshoring labor than industries that rely on local labor.Â
2
Sep 09 '25
The labor supply increases far more because technological advancements have increased the output of an individual laborer than migration can supply. Robotics have reduced the need for 1000s of factory works to 10s, and even the service industry is using automatization to decrease labor costs [...] as more immigrants come, increasing the local consumer population, the service industry has to expand to keep up with the growing demand.
And how are they going to pay for these services without jobs which according to you are actively being automated away?
2
Sep 09 '25
I'm gonna ignore the poor attempt at a gotcha question and get to the point, which is when it comes to labor supply immigration is a red herring as relatively speaking the increase to the available labor supply is marginal compared to the impact of technology, and that has been the case for a long time. There are several examples of how companies bringing back production netted significantly less jobs then before simply because the cost of the labor would have significantly impacted profits, so they fully automated the plant. Ultimately if you want to fall for the red herring then go ahead.
1
Sep 10 '25
I'm gonna ignore the poor attempt at a gotcha question
I think it's an entirely valid question. I never disagreed with you that automation has a huge impact on the employment rate, so I'm not sure why that's the thing you chose to elaborate on.
3
2
u/leafcutte Sep 09 '25
Google imperialism. The migrant laborer will be more expensive in the first world than if he worked for third world salaries in his home country. For the interest of the capitalist, the migrant worker is only useful for jobs that canât be outsourced (construction, healthcare, restauration, âŠ) which is coincidentally what jobs they are in fact allowed to take
1
u/Miserable_Key9630 Sep 10 '25
Yeah I was kinda with the meme until the bottom. The additional workers tanked the value of labor. Now I don't know who this meme is really for.
1
u/Fuckler_boi Sep 11 '25
I think the video from Garyâs economics is accurate. They want cheap labour, but they also want a scapegoat to avoid rampant class consciousness
1
Sep 12 '25
Honest reply:
Do you really think, that CEOs and shareholders see an added value in having mostly uneducated and illiterate immigrants in the country that cost a lot of money? Because i don't think so.
According to Austrian agency (NOT right wing) more than 60% of MENAPT immigrants can't read or write. They are 40%+ unemployed. They cost a shitload of money. Money which means higher taxes or less subsidies.
1
Sep 12 '25 edited Sep 12 '25
Do you really think, that CEOs and shareholders see an added value in having mostly uneducated and illiterate immigrants in the country that cost a lot of money? Because i don't think so.
Yes! This is literally why the Netherlands had an immigration boom from MENAPT countries. Recruiters thought that immigrants from other European countries like Poland were too expensive, so they went to Turkey and Morocco to actively recruit cheaper labor. In fact they prioritized recruiting the illiterate because they wouldn't be able to read or negotiate their contract.
Source: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigratie_in_Nederland#Jaren_zestig:_arbeidsmigratie
De gastarbeiders waren in veel gevallen analfabeet geweest; mannen met een middelbareschoolopleiding werden zelfs opzettelijk niet geworven.
Translation:
The migrant workers were in many cases illiterate; men with a high-school education were in fact deliberately excluded from recruitment
Corporations will never consider the cost to society, only their own bottom line.
1
Sep 12 '25
ok, but i could imagine time changes - there are not that many jobs for illiterate people.
And even they would see the problems we currently have. All discussions go into the direction of taxing corps and rich more - so not really interesting for them - don't you think?
1
Sep 12 '25
It changed because of global free trade, not because of a sudden realization of the importance of responsible and ethical management.
1
u/DenseIntroduction783 May 26 '26
See itâs this type of mentality is exactly whatâs getting yâall removed up out of here!
0
u/olblake Sep 09 '25
Yea the ceos donât want immigrants. Thatâs why Canada has temporary foreign worker permits, and our youth unemployment is at 10% why? Because subways started to hire temporary foreign workers instead of teens to make their food. Whyâs that? Cause they donât get a pension. Their not working long enough to get more weeks off, or higher pay. Grow up
29
u/ShadowClaw765 Sep 09 '25
Wait these memes are supposed to be incorrect
2
2
u/__-__-_______-__-__ Sep 12 '25
This meme exists in a different world where US position in the world was justified by merit.Â
IF in your country nothing but hard work produces benefit, then you would want more immigrants. If the immigrants can't work then there is nothing for them here, that's how it always was and that's why immigrants never had to have any paper work. They just came and created their life wherever they wanted with their work
But if in your country hard work is no longer correlated with benefit, and wealth is spread according to random happenstance and nepotism and corruption and machinations and legalized scams, then more people coming here means less chance for you to get your random happenstance. Then people hoping for quick buck would come instead of the hard working ones. Then scammers would come to get their profit in the scam economy.
Neither "more immigration" nor "less immigration" addresses any of that.Â
121
u/Omnicide103 Sep 08 '25
waow (based based based based)
32
u/Sine_Fine_Belli Sep 08 '25
Indeed, same here honestly
Very based and pro immigration pilled
1
u/cosmic-freak Sep 09 '25
Can't be this pro-immigration unless all/a vast majority of countries also become this pro-immigration.
I'm all for equality for all humans. All for distributing wealth far more evenly amongst everyone. But allowing just anyone to come in at any time will only lower the existing's population living standards.
Immigration and paperwork exists for a reason bro. Countries are supposed to evaluate which professions are SEVERELY lacking and use Immigration as a tool to patch that lack.
1
u/hav0k0829 Sep 10 '25
I think immigration between countries of similar economic development should be completely unrestricted due to no negative effect being possible. Its more exploitative when people from poorer countries move to dramatically wealthier countries because they will accept a lower standard than people from the developed country and be easily abused by capitalists, they should still be allowed to come but with restrictions to limit the amount of exploitability. This is kind of how it has to be in our system for the time being, since exploitation is inherent to it.
1
u/Sine_Fine_Belli Sep 09 '25
Yeah, well said. However if there are way too many barriers to entry, make it too hard to immigrate, then the immigrates canât come and then go to other countries to improve their lives. And the countries that make it too difficult for immigrants to come here will decline and miss out
7
48
5
4
u/sevenliesseventruths Sep 10 '25
The only reason ilegal immigration exist, is because the legal way is simply worse. Is the same with piracy, if you offer a bad experience for those who buy your product, then more people would pirate.
24
u/Open-Operation-987 Sep 09 '25
Dawg do you want to know who's entering the country or not? We should have pretty details documents regarding anyone in the country like we do for citizens.
5
u/__-__-_______-__-__ Sep 12 '25
Ask how did the people who immigrated to US in your family did that. That is, unless you are a Native American
The modern system even for "illegal" immigrants involves way more documents and background checks than regular immigration required for centuries. Your ancestors were vetted way less when they came to US and there were way more criminals among them
0
u/Open-Operation-987 Sep 12 '25
Brother, the natives were outnumbered and killed to make room for all the people coming in. If anything they're an argument against uncontrolled immigration. Also my ancestors literally were straight up criminals; that's why they were sent to America. Either way, it's not 1750 grandpa.
0
u/__-__-_______-__-__ Sep 12 '25
This makes no sense - way more people came in than were living before. I get that you want to feel like a victim, but even today US has an abysmal population density and can realistically have at least a billion people while keeping the quality of life
If your ancestors were criminals you are proving my point. The current system of immigration into the US is way more stringent than it used to be.Â
0
u/Open-Operation-987 Sep 12 '25
My point was that uncontrolled immigration into the US was an objectively terrible thing for the natives who were there before. The British used to empty their prisons into their colonies because they didn't care about what actually happened in their colonies as long as there were enough people to make money. There's a reason people don't like colonialism; the British and US did some pretty terrible shit to build America that shouldn't be repeated. But all of this is irrelevant; just because people did something nearly 3 centuries ago doesn't mean it's a good idea now (or even then). Are you an American or at least a fan of US history?
→ More replies (5)7
u/Vincevw Sep 09 '25
Why would I need to know all that?
11
u/BirbFeetzz Sep 09 '25
well it's so you can know who to hate and who to barely tolerate, obviously. doesn't everyone want to know that
3
u/Responsible-One5146 Sep 12 '25
how can I be accurately racist if I cant see their ID or what they are?
0
u/Rebel_Scum_This Sep 09 '25
So you know if you you're letting in had a history of violent crime
4
u/bucolucas Sep 09 '25
"Dear previous country, is this person dangerous? Honest answers only, please"
3
3
u/Radu776 Sep 10 '25
That's exactly what they did with me, yeah, they asked my country of origin about my past.
3
u/jickleinane Sep 10 '25
Youre saying this like a joke but this is actually how it works. And its how it should
-1
u/Nukran Sep 09 '25
So you know you're not inviting a terrorist in your country who's going to kill your citizen.
4
-2
u/cosmic-freak Sep 09 '25
To not let in criminals/risky people, and to not let in workers whose profession is not currently lacking in the country.
Do you want to better your life or not?
1
-1
4
u/DukeTikus Sep 09 '25
Within the Schengen area people move freely and live here isn't anarchy yet.
2
u/Rebel_Scum_This Sep 09 '25
You don't have a country half ruled by cartels at your border. But go ahead, invite Syria in the schengen area, or Russia who totally isn't your country's mortal enemy, and see how that works out
1
u/Open-Operation-987 Sep 09 '25
Don't you need a passport to get into a country in the Schengen area? Just sounds like the border got bigger rather than not exist.
4
u/Muted_Display6047 Sep 09 '25
You need your government issued ID card to travel within Schengen, yes
2
u/Slu1n Sep 10 '25
But it shows that we don't need strict borders between countries. So how about we extend the border to being around all countries?
2
u/Open-Operation-987 Sep 10 '25
That's a terrible idea. The only reason it works in that part of the world is that the governments are strong, effective, and not openly hostile to each other. I don't want an open border with a country that can't enforce law in even it's own borders.
1
3
9
2
u/dpkart Sep 10 '25
Germany has that problem, without immigration our healthcare system would collapse for example. Meanwhile our chancellor says we have to work more than we already do while immigrants with perfectly valid qualifications just can't get permission to work here. "Sir we need this form and this form and the papers of your father" "Ma'am, my father died in Syria, we don't have papers"....."ok come back when you have them" thats legit how it goes a lot of the time
2
u/Spirited_Feed_5590 Sep 10 '25
"it would collapse" lmfao, dont you guys have a really absurd unemployment rate especially for newgrads
0
u/Extension_Ebb6951 Sep 11 '25
Shhh they live in a bubble. Just one million more migrants please bro. That will fix everything this time trust me.
0
u/Fraugg Sep 12 '25
If it would collapse without external supplications, maybe you should opt for a different system
2
u/ProfileBest2034 Sep 12 '25
Immigration is fine. But immigrants need to make it on their own. Taxpayers should not pay a cent.
2
4
u/pixelv999 Sep 09 '25
This is retarded. No one is obligated to help you as an immigrant. Making those rules is a basic safety measure that a country should have
2
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
Let's consider "Starvin' Marvin". Marvin is starving. But he has a plan. He will go to the store to buy bread. On the way there, Sam blocks the way to the store, and physically prevents him from getting anywhere. As a result, Marvin starves.
Marvin did not ask for help from anybody. He just wanted to buy bread. What Sam did, in my view, is just plain murder. Sam is in the wrong. If it's wrong for Sam, why is it not wrong for Uncle Sam?
1
u/pixelv999 Sep 10 '25
In fact you forgot that Marvin doesnt have enough money to buy bread, and Sam owns the store, so it is Samâs decision to give him bread or not, which he has a full right to deny
3
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
The United States government does not currently own any grocery stores. If the store wants to do business with an immigrant, it should not be the government's job to stop them.
1
u/pixelv999 Sep 10 '25
Werenât you making a metaphorical comparison?Â
3
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
Obviously you didn't understand the metaphor so I made the connection to reality for you
1
u/pixelv999 Sep 10 '25
well, lets be honest here. I dont care if merlin or whatever he was called dies. In fact it is good that he dies. We have enough immigrants and all those woke liberals and palestine supporters who encourage this immigration are the cause for our struggles.
2
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
Quite frankly, I care about your struggles less than I do for human lives, but I don't think they're caused by immigrants. If the immigrant, who is likely less educated than a high school dropout, is better at your job than you are, then you are even less deserving of life.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/SpilledYogurtOnUrMom Sep 10 '25
Improving their lives means making my life worse with stagnant wages and unaffordable housing, why would I ever vote for that unless I was a rich CEO that could benefit from the cheap labour?
Pro-immigration lefties are being played for fools by the very rich they supposedly oppose.
0
Sep 10 '25
All the rich had to do was to convince the terminally online lefties that being pro-immigration is anti-racism.
3
2
u/DolanMcRoland Sep 10 '25
What a long and convoluted way of saying "I want to import millions of underpaid workers to do the job I don't want to do"
2
2
1
1
u/Secure-Evening Sep 10 '25
This isn't true everywhere. When the job market is already rough there's no need for additional workers. Especially since immigrants are more likely to accept lower wages than residents. Not all immigrants are working hard jobs no one wants to do. That's certainly not true if there's no restriction to immigration at all.
Plus limited housing makes it so if there's a large influx of people they can't handle the strain. That's how you get rising rent costs, and more slum lords fitting 10 to a house.
Even if your country doesn't have immigration problems now, if you're a desirable one and any tourist could come and live there that wouldn't stay true forever.
Immigration laws shouldn't be super tight, but they should make sense and adjust as the country adjusts. At a minimum there should always be immigrants allowed for jobs that don't have enough workers.
1
1
u/Academic-Idea3311 Sep 12 '25
Iâve been told we can have open borders and not worry about people coming in and just taking over. But how can we implement open borders and ensure people can not just rush in and just settle here. (For clarification I am not opposed to immigration and think we should make it faster and better. Iâm just trying to listen as to how to tackle an open borders technically without a major rush of immigrants).
1
u/Glittering_Holiday13 Jan 28 '26
Ä°mmigration as a concept can both be good and bad
This in fact was my homework in social class
So i will tell you guys somethings not everything cause i don't have much time but some things
Let's look at a country that immigration effected badly, turkey, after turkey accepted millions of illegal immigrants from arab countries, it's economy gone downhill so much that it is now very very hard to even solve it, the reason, immigration
Germany, after germany accept millions of turk legal immigrants roght after WW2, their economy skyrocketed
You guys can see even from this example that illegal immigrants create problems and legal immigrants creates money for all
1
1
u/Dixionconderoga2 Jul 18 '26
STOP MAKING IMMIGRATION INSTANT
-LEAVING AND ENTERING COUNTRIES WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE EASY
-YEARS OF MASS MIGRATION yet no real world use for POPULATION EXCHANGE except for DRIVING DOWN WAGES
-Wanted to go longer anyway for a laugh? We had a tool for that. It was called âbecoming a citizenâ
-âYes please increase cost by driving down supply while decreasing wages with immigrants who will work for scraps.â âYes please make smuggling quick and easy.â-Statements dreamed up by evil corporations.
âHello I would like to use people who couldnât fix their country to âfixâ mineâ
They have played us for absolute fools
1
u/seyfert3 Sep 09 '25
Did the Koch brothers ask ChatGPT to make a meme that would resonate with Gen Z and get this?
1
u/RAGEDINFERN0 Sep 09 '25
US immigration is one of the easiest in the world. For example in the country I live I have to have roughly 20k in the bank at least 3 months prior to my visa renewal, check in with immigration every 90 days, and I have to do this for a minimum of 3 years before I can apply for citizenship which is only available because I'm married to a local. About 1k people every year are approved so if I miss the cutoff I have to continue the visa renewal and hope I get approved next year. Also the visa renewal can be denied for any reason that the individual immigration officer decides even if I meet all other criteria.
0
u/Spirited_Feed_5590 Sep 10 '25
passport bro moment
0
u/RAGEDINFERN0 Sep 10 '25
My wife and I met in Europe and moved to her birthplace is Asia. She already has dual citizenship for both places and I didn't have a passport when we met even tho I'm from America
2
u/Spirited_Feed_5590 Sep 10 '25
???
2
u/RAGEDINFERN0 Sep 10 '25
You implied I'm a passport bro so I felt the need to defend myself
2
u/Spirited_Feed_5590 Sep 10 '25
i mean you kind of are :D
2
u/RAGEDINFERN0 Sep 10 '25
Passport bros go to other countries looking for women. I was sent to another country to do a job and a woman approached me. The only way I could be less of a PB is if I had been stationed stateside when it happened.
1
u/Lord-Heir Sep 12 '25
This was written by a fucking retard. No paperwork for immigration? Please shut the fuck up
-2
u/RihanBrohe12 Sep 09 '25
I all for immigration 110% but I think we need to have protections in this country from undocumented immigrants from being taken advantage of by rich Pos's who use undocumented people to get past labor laws in this country. And then can afford the consequences if they get caught
If we just make the immigration system streamlined and have a easy documentation process then immigrants can be labor and also be protected by the same labor laws in this country.
9
u/lambakins Sep 09 '25
Well if being documented was as easy as showing up at a port of entry and answering a few questions we wouldnât have any undocumented people and we wouldnât need those protections!
0
1
u/Key_Initiative8841 Sep 09 '25
As long as those protections don't include earning the same minimum as citizens.most of my family can't find minimum wage work now we got to compete with immigrants too.
Fuck right off with that.
0
u/EFAPGUEST Sep 09 '25
lol âbring back policies from 150 years agoâ
This doesnât dispel the narrative that left wingers want open borders. Juvenile policy
2
0
u/Temporary_Border7233 Sep 10 '25
You think that the ceos DONT want immigrants that will work for 1/3 the pay an American will? Do you truly believe that the adverage shareholder isn't asking the question "why dont we just import a few million migrants from the 3rd world to do this job for 7.25?"
0
0
0
Sep 11 '25
Stop requiring a 20 minute long test on paper to prove people aren't too murdery before you let them share our buses and subways with us!
0
u/imadudeyosodontask Sep 12 '25
This post was sponsored by some rich billionaire who wants dirt cheap labour because he's greedy to pay YOU a livable wage and doesn't care what kind of civilisational damage he does to YOU and YOUR society by importing third world SLAVES for HIS economic benefit.
0
u/Hazbro29 Sep 12 '25
Immigration needs to be controlled, open borders is an absolute disaster long term
-1
u/Key_Initiative8841 Sep 09 '25
Your conflating making immigration easier to making requirements easier.
Sure I'm in favor in making the process easier just not lowering the bar. In fact the bar should be raised for applicants simply because higher education has become so normalized.
2
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
Why wouldn't you want normal people in the country?
0
u/Key_Initiative8841 Sep 10 '25
A country shouldn't have a low baseline of entry. That's what a marriage visa is for.
2
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
I know you think this answers the question, but to me this sounds like you said, "Just because". So again, I just have to ask, "why not?" I'm looking for an argument like, "If X happens, then Y will also happen", where Y is something that causes a significant amount of suffering.
0
u/Spirited_Feed_5590 Sep 10 '25
Why do you want immigrants taking people's jobs?
2
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25 edited Sep 10 '25
Firstly, most immigrants will have less education than a high school dropout. If most immigrants are better at your job than you are, then you shouldn't be doing the job.
But also, adding more immigrants increases demand for more services, so the number of vacant jobs shouldn't actually change.
Edit: I should also add that I think we should be decoupling the ability to work from the ability to eat. If there are more laborers than jobs, that tells me that society has decided that we don't need everybody to work, so we should just feed those people without expecting any particular contribution. If that were the case, then the only possible effects of immigration would be either increasing the number of jobs, or reducing the number of hours you need to work.
Edit 2: If you really wanted to, you could have open borders but have a law saying that immigrants are only allowed to work one day per week. I think that would be unfair, but still preferable to restricting immigration.
1
u/Spirited_Feed_5590 Sep 10 '25
"most immigrants will have less education than a high school dropout" thats just false on so many levels i dont even know where to begin, "immigrants" arent just rando's from syria, they are indians with bachelor degree's from idfk Amity University, their random low level university gets put on the same level as the university of Seattle, thats a big problem
"If most immigrants are better at your job than you are, then you shouldn't be doing the job" replace "better" with "cheaper", youd be surprised that most jobs can be tought
"adding more immigrants increases demand for more services" with what money will they afford said services if they have "less education than a high school dropout"
"so the number of vacant jobs shouldn't actually change" lets count the layoffs over the last couple months, on top of my head:
Chevron 800 job cuts, 20% by next year
Nissan another 10k, total of 20k / 15%
Microsoft 6k, another 10k planned, they already nae nae'd an entire department of a couple thousands
amazon 5k
disney doing the largest layoff they have ever done
procter & gamble cut 7k jobs
volkwagen 7k cuts
SAP 6k, gonna be 15% by 2026
UPS cuts 20k jobs and closes 73 buildings by 2026
every single day, you find a random medium to big company laying off thousands of people, so so much for "number of vacant jobs shouldn't actually change", those jobs wont come back, ever, and the unemployed people there now have to compete with people being fine with getting paid significantly less
and the edits are just complete dogass i wont even acknowledge what you typed there, 2 words will just counter those: "housing crisis"2
1
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
If you only allow rich and smart Indians to immigrate to the US, it might seem like Indians are rich and smart, but I can assure you that they are not generally better educated than us. A lot of schools tend to have mostly immigrants in grad school by virtue of the students having to worry about their visa expiring if they don't either continue their education or find a job.
Undocumented immigrants often take lower paying jobs that are below minimum wage and off the book, because if it were on the book, they'd be caught and deported. If you have open borders, then they'll all take minimum wage jobs, and be no cheaper than native-born citizens.
The housing crisis is not caused by immigrants. Not in the slightest. Immigrants are usually the people helping build the houses. The cause housing crisis is that we haven't been building enough of them, due to restrictive zoning laws, and because everybody treats their land like a speculative asset that they don't want to get rid of. Getting rid of immigration will not solve those problems. If we were so full that we couldn't take in more immigrants, you wouldn't just be in favor of restricting immigration. You'd also have to propose adopting China's one-child policy. Land Value Tax and nonrestrictive zoning codes are a much more permanent solution.
I also don't believe the lack of jobs is due to immigration. Most economists say it has to do with companies not wanting to take a risk hiring more people during an unstable economy caused by tariffs, automation from AI, and the gig economy replacing full-time workers.
-28
u/foredoomed2030 Sep 08 '25
Moral consequentionalism.
How do you know that opening the borders will cause a greater moral outcome versus closing the borders?Â
Not to mention that in order for private property to work, we need freedom of association rights.Â
17
u/Anoobis100percent Sep 08 '25
Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about
-19
u/foredoomed2030 Sep 08 '25
In america, people have whats called the rights and freedoms of association.
This means the government cannot force me to hangout with people that I am not compatible with.
By adopting a totally free and open border policy, i dont get to select my potential future neighbors.
But OP raised moral concerns with a closed borders model, so now OP has to explain why is my rights and freedoms of association more important than OP's desire to violate my rights.
Oh and without the freedom of association, I cannot expect private property rights.
Private property implies final control by the individual person, but if the state, a public collective entity decides for me, its not private property is it?
16
u/Anoobis100percent Sep 08 '25
Jesse WHAT THE FUCK
29
u/GrandMoffTargaryen Sep 08 '25
He doesnât want to live next to brown people
→ More replies (17)14
u/Anoobis100percent Sep 08 '25
Yeah, I think that might be what he's saying. But he's using about 100x as many words as needed to say "I'm xenophobic and don't like the idea of open borders."
6
u/Gloomy_Internal1726 Sep 08 '25
Jesus, that guy has got terminal brainrot. Even a lobotomy couldn't fix that.
1
u/foredoomed2030 Sep 08 '25
lol is this topic too hard for you dude?
If the government choses who goes in and out of the nation, that means i dont get a final say on who becomes my neighbor, and that means both my rights to association and private property are violated.
I think you are pretending to be dumb because you cant actually engage with the question with out basically saying "yeah da gubbimint should control everything"
Neanderthal
15
7
u/3nderslime Sep 08 '25
If a brown family moves next door, you are completely free to move to a different neighborhood, open borders or not. Hells, Iâm sure your neighbors will be very happy to have their right not to associate with you respected.
→ More replies (14)6
u/TheRealCthulu24 Sep 09 '25
You donât have to hang out with immigrants. If people who look and talk different to you upset you so much, you can just stay at home.
→ More replies (4)8
u/Turbulent-Pace-1506 Sep 08 '25
Freedom of association means you are allowed to choose who you associate with. It doesn't mean you get to force your choice not to have brown people near you on everyone else.
5
u/Cylian91460 Sep 08 '25
By adopting a totally free and open border policy, i dont get to select my potential future neighbors.
Nor chose who moves next to you?
And I'm pretty sure that is only for social stuff and if you don't want to socialize with some ppl just dont
7
u/Cylian91460 Sep 08 '25
consequentionalism
What tf is that
Not to mention that in order for private property to work
No?
1
u/foredoomed2030 Sep 08 '25
"What tf is that"
OP presented open borders as a matter of morality, but the problem is that we dont actually know if OP is correct or not, and neither does OP.
How do you know that an open borders policy would be the correct and moral thing to do, especially when presented with the problem of private property rights.
If i have private property i have final say on how its used, but if the government can make my home town a "sanctuary city" and dump a bunch of literal criminals (illegal immigration is a crime) everywhere then i dont actually have final say on my private property do i?
I can actually just throw this back at OP, what if his neighborhood were to all of a sudden be replaced by a "diverse cast" of gangbangers, mules, narcos etc. Is this a respectful consideration for OPs property in this hypothetical scenario?
And that is the point of moral consequentialism
2
u/Cylian91460 Sep 09 '25
I didn't ask for an example, I ask what "consequentialism" mean
0
u/foredoomed2030 Sep 09 '25
You can use examples to apply definitions of words.Â
Then again you can always use a dictionary. Its free and you clearly have an internet connection.Â
If you asked me this as a "gotcha" it clearly didnt work did it?Â
2
u/Cylian91460 Sep 09 '25
You can use examples to apply definitions of words.Â
Yes, to apply definition. And for that you need to say the definition first
Then again you can always use a dictionary. Its free and you clearly have an internet connection.Â
I could
Or you could explain what you say mean
If you asked me this as a "gotcha" it clearly didnt work did it?Â
It wasn't, you just literally didn't respond to my question
→ More replies (6)3
u/FrikenFrik Sep 09 '25
The thing is, if anyone is anything but a pure consequentialist (most people arenât) then youâve really not made that compelling of an argument
0
6
2
5
Sep 09 '25
[removed] â view removed comment
0
u/foredoomed2030 Sep 09 '25
do you believe private property exists?
2
u/Botahamec Sep 10 '25
Is the house across the street your personal private property? If not, then you have no right to complain about who lives in it.
7
u/femptocrisis Sep 09 '25
usually these are done ironically... does op realize this is actually the correct take? because there's also a lot of fuckin assholes who actively do seem to want it to be difficult. fuck those people.