"A world of free movement could be $78 trillion richer"
https://www.economist.com/news/world-if/21724907-yes-it-would-be-disruptive-potential-gains-are-so-vast-objectors-could-be-bribed
Some key points of the article:
- Workers become more productive when they move from a poor country to a richer one with more efficient firms and better capital.
- It is more difficult to transfer better institutions into countries than it is to transfer people from those countries into ones with better institutions.
- Not all people from poor countries necessarily want to immigrate. Only 13% do.
- Open borders can actually lead to less overcrowding overall since immigrants from countries where large families are common tend to have smaller families when they immigrate, even if those families are still bigger than those of the native population
- Uses example of the US to show benefits of cultural enrichment brought by waves of immigration from around the world.
- There are solutions to prevent migrants from being a strain on resources or to prevent them from enacting huge political and cultural changes, such as preventing them from voting until x years in the country (after which they will be likely to have assimilated) and preventing them from receiving welfare benefits.
What do you think? Do you think the world would be a better place if anyone from any country was free to work in any country of their choice? Do you believe that low-skilled immigration can bring benefits to an economy?
Some key points of the article:
- Workers become more productive when they move from a poor country to a richer one with more efficient firms and better capital.
- It is more difficult to transfer better institutions into countries than it is to transfer people from those countries into ones with better institutions.
- Not all people from poor countries necessarily want to immigrate. Only 13% do.
- Open borders can actually lead to less overcrowding overall since immigrants from countries where large families are common tend to have smaller families when they immigrate, even if those families are still bigger than those of the native population
- Uses example of the US to show benefits of cultural enrichment brought by waves of immigration from around the world.
- There are solutions to prevent migrants from being a strain on resources or to prevent them from enacting huge political and cultural changes, such as preventing them from voting until x years in the country (after which they will be likely to have assimilated) and preventing them from receiving welfare benefits.
What do you think? Do you think the world would be a better place if anyone from any country was free to work in any country of their choice? Do you believe that low-skilled immigration can bring benefits to an economy?
(edited 6 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Trapz99
- Not all people from poor countries necessarily want to immigrate. Only 13% do.
- Not all people from poor countries necessarily want to immigrate. Only 13% do.
I find it impossible to believe that only 13% of Indians/Mexicans/Africans would want to emigrate to the US/UK/EU given the chance.
I really don't think it would be good for poor countries talent pool. We even see in the UK that people have to move for jobs, why would someone stay in Poland when he can't get a job?
Journalists at The Economist are always welcome to show us the benefits of freedom of movement by moving to Afghanistan for a wee while.
Bar the fact that there is this thing called society that is important to keep together I find their claims utterly baseless and moronic.
Original post by Ezisola
I find it impossible to believe that only 13% of Indians/Mexicans/Africans would want to emigrate to the US/UK/EU given the chance.
Because, unlike the rhetoric of the right, most people would stay in a culture theyre most familiar with and have an identity affiliated to.
Original post by Ezisola
I find it impossible to believe that only 13% of Indians/Mexicans/Africans would want to emigrate to the US/UK/EU given the chance.
Well that's what the survey found. It's ridiculous to assume that billions of Indians, Mexicans and Africans are going to want to move to a country that has a completely different culture and language, has no one that they know, and has a different climate and where they might not be able to actually live a good life. Many Indians, Mexicans and Africans are actually happy where they live. It's only a few that want to leave. It might seem obvious that they would all want to leave when you consider how poor and badly managed those countries are, but there are many other factors that lead to many of them not wanting to leave.
Original post by CollectiveSoul
Journalists at The Economist are always welcome to show us the benefits of freedom of movement by moving to Afghanistan for a wee while.
Why? Freedom of movement doesn't mean that people should be forced to move to a country they do not want to move to. It means that they have the opportunity to do so.
Original post by Appleorpear
I really don't think it would be good for poor countries talent pool. We even see in the UK that people have to move for jobs, why would someone stay in Poland when he can't get a job?
That is a good point since immigration can often lead to a 'brain drain' of highly skilled people leaving a country and, as a consequence of this, the country losing valuable skilled labour which could benefit the economy. However, one could argue that low skilled immigration from poor countries to rich countries can benefit the source country since immigrants can send remittances to their home countries, which boosts consumption and investment within those countries, enabling them to provide better opportunities for their residents. Also, the world could perhaps be more efficient if highly skilled, talented people move to countries with better institutions where they can use their skills for good, rather than stay in countries where their skills would be wasted. For example, there are few opportunities for good computer programmers in countries like Uganda compared to the United Kingdom, so if highly skilled programmers from Uganda move, their skills lead to more economic growth overall.
Only that much? I heard it would be $9999 trillion richer every month.
For the mere price of only 13% of the third world moving to Europe, this sounds like a great opportunity. Nothing can possibly go wrong.
For the mere price of only 13% of the third world moving to Europe, this sounds like a great opportunity. Nothing can possibly go wrong.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Caesar333
Because, unlike the rhetoric of the right, most people would stay in a culture theyre most familiar with and have an identity affiliated to.
It will start as a trickle and then become a flood as their culture becomes more prevalent in the receiving countries.
Original post by Caesar333
Anyone with a basic understanding of economics will understand this.
The fact that immigrants/kids of immigrants outperform natives at schools is proof of that. Brits are dumb asf.
The fact that immigrants/kids of immigrants outperform natives at schools is proof of that. Brits are dumb asf.
I wouldn't say they are dumber but it does seem that children of immigrants from poorer countries to richer countries tend to have more of a drive to succeed and are more likely to appreciate the opportunities they have. But it does show that perhaps immigration can benefit the host country as well as the source country.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/sep/15/children-immigrants-higher-education-england-oecd-study
60% of children of immigrants go into higher education, compared to 46% of children from non-immigrant backgrounds.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Trapz99
https://www.economist.com/news/world-if/21724907-yes-it-would-be-disruptive-potential-gains-are-so-vast-objectors-could-be-bribed
Some key points of the article:
- Workers become more productive when they move from a poor country to a richer one with more efficient firms and better capital.
- It is more difficult to transfer better institutions into countries than it is to transfer people from those countries into ones with better institutions.
- Not all people from poor countries necessarily want to immigrate. Only 13% do.
- Open borders can actually lead to less overcrowding overall since immigrants from countries where large families are common tend to have smaller families when they immigrate, even if those families are still bigger than those of the native population
- Uses example of the US to show benefits of cultural enrichment brought by waves of immigration from around the world.
- There are solutions to prevent migrants from being a strain on resources or to prevent them from enacting huge political and cultural changes, such as preventing them from voting until x years in the country (after which they will be likely to have assimilated) and preventing them from receiving welfare benefits.
What do you think? Do you think the world would be a better place if anyone from any country was free to work in any country of their choice? Do you believe that low-skilled immigration can bring benefits to an economy?
Some key points of the article:
- Workers become more productive when they move from a poor country to a richer one with more efficient firms and better capital.
- It is more difficult to transfer better institutions into countries than it is to transfer people from those countries into ones with better institutions.
- Not all people from poor countries necessarily want to immigrate. Only 13% do.
- Open borders can actually lead to less overcrowding overall since immigrants from countries where large families are common tend to have smaller families when they immigrate, even if those families are still bigger than those of the native population
- Uses example of the US to show benefits of cultural enrichment brought by waves of immigration from around the world.
- There are solutions to prevent migrants from being a strain on resources or to prevent them from enacting huge political and cultural changes, such as preventing them from voting until x years in the country (after which they will be likely to have assimilated) and preventing them from receiving welfare benefits.
What do you think? Do you think the world would be a better place if anyone from any country was free to work in any country of their choice? Do you believe that low-skilled immigration can bring benefits to an economy?
Personally yes I think freedom of movement could bring major benefits and does bring major benefits to countries that practice it. However right now I do not think it is sustainable in the long term. Perhaps in the future it could be, but not right now. And yes low-skilled immigration does bring benefits. However I think that it should only occur when there is a significant shortage in a low skilled area and after any potential members of the native population cannot fulfil the shortages.
Just my opinion, let me know if you think i'm talking out my ass.
Original post by Kaffee_1998
Personally yes I think freedom of movement could bring major benefits and does bring major benefits to countries that practice it. However right now I do not think it is sustainable in the long term. Perhaps in the future it could be, but not right now. And yes low-skilled immigration does bring benefits. However I think that it should only occur when there is a significant shortage in a low skilled area and after any potential members of the native population cannot fulfil the shortages.
Just my opinion, let me know if you think i'm talking out my ass.
Just my opinion, let me know if you think i'm talking out my ass.
Actually I agree. I don't think that actual free movement across the world will be feasible in reality because at the moment there is so much opposition to immigration across Europe and the US.
Original post by Ezisola
It will start as a trickle and then become a flood as their culture becomes more prevalent in the receiving countries.
Is there any evidence for this? It's not just about culture- there are other factors such as family and language barriers that discourage people from wanting to immigrate to richer countries.
Original post by Ezisola
It will start as a trickle and then become a flood as their culture becomes more prevalent in the receiving countries.
Do you have any evidence for that catfish? Because that sort of rhetoric is nothing more than far right jargon.
Original post by Trapz99
Is there any evidence for this? It's not just about culture- there are other factors such as family and language barriers that discourage people from wanting to immigrate to richer countries.
Read his profile lol.
Original post by Caesar333
Do you have any evidence for that catfish? Because that sort of rhetoric is nothing more than far right jargon.
We've made this mistake before, even the left now admit it.
Original post by Trapz99
I wouldn't say they are dumber but it does seem that children of immigrants from poorer countries to richer countries tend to have more of a drive to succeed and are more likely to appreciate the opportunities they have. But it does show that perhaps immigration can benefit the host country as well as the source country.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/sep/15/children-immigrants-higher-education-england-oecd-study
60% of children of immigrants go into higher education, compared to 46% of children from non-immigrant backgrounds.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/sep/15/children-immigrants-higher-education-england-oecd-study
60% of children of immigrants go into higher education, compared to 46% of children from non-immigrant backgrounds.
Yes you're right. It's definitely a cultural thing.
The whole "taking jobs" idea isnt about being willing to be paid less, it's about a)brits are too lazy and b) not qualified for jobs that are out of their skill range.
Original post by Ezisola
We've made this mistake before, even the left now admit it.
White brits make up 87% of the country. Hardly a flood.
Come on catfish, you can do better than that bro.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
