PDA

View Full Version : Are Immigrants Benefiting The Economy of Western Nations?



Northern Paladin
Thursday, August 4th, 2005, 09:45 PM
Are Immigrants Benefiting The Economy of Western Nations? Please justify your view with relevant facts and statistics.

SouthernBoy
Friday, August 5th, 2005, 05:05 PM
No, but they might perhaps be a benefit if there was a lack of workers. Their presence now only takes jobs away from natives, who won't work for certain wages, thus lowering wage amounts for everyone.

Schutzstaffelor
Friday, August 5th, 2005, 05:46 PM
my is a contracter building real state in chicago, and he gladly hires polish immigrants laborers over american ones because the poles work harder and better (their work is much neater than americans) and for less money. sometimes immigrant labor is better than native labor. sometimes he hires mexicans, but he prefers poles the most.

beowulf_
Saturday, August 6th, 2005, 11:27 AM
Surely it depends on which immigrant group is in question,
but in respect to the fact that because of demographic
reasons nowadays only low-IQ countries are able to
contribute larger immigrant streams - no.

E.g. take a look at the German high school statistics:
http://www.destatis.de/basis/e/biwiku/schultab16.htm

Deling
Saturday, August 6th, 2005, 02:04 PM
"Surely it depends on which immigrant group is in question,
but in respect to the fact that because of demographic
reasons nowadays only low-IQ countries are able to
contribute larger immigrant streams - no."

Well, isn't that a part of the problem? Our generation is academical and doesn't want "dirty" work. Who's gonna do the job if the young work force are theoretical pen-pushers and don't know anything about industrial work, or never visited a work floor?
The economy of Western nations, atleast the Swedish (the only one I can really know anything about), is very service-based; people study art, engineering, physics, social planning a.s.o at university, but strictly theoretical, aiming at pen-pusher jobs; and until then do from day-to-day work at the local Lidl or McDonald's.
But what about teachers, doctors, agricultural expertise, manufacturing work, and the wise that demand practical skills? When our generations become more and more servicized and pen-pushing, the result is worker-import.

Thus the problem is our supposedly high IQ. Instead of practical education; theoretical. Why not import educated and, often experienced, doctors and industrial workers then?

Expelling all immigrants won't solve any economical problems in Sweden atleast; it's the mentally and virtues of the Swedish generations (this and the coming) that must be changed: forget bourgeousied education, aim for the education of the "stupid".

PS: There ARE jobs here in Sweden, even in this forsaken hole I'm living in, at steel-works and mines a.s.o. But only few Swedes WANT such honorable jobs: no, they want to become veterinarians, designers/engineers, social workers and city planners, lawyers and such.
So our problem is our supposedly high "IQ"; we need more people who aim "lower", and the bourgeoisified education system where theoretical and academical study/jobs are Good and practical/skill-based study/jobs are Bad (=for those who are "stupid" in school).

Sad really...

Schutzstaffelor
Saturday, August 6th, 2005, 02:24 PM
i don't why people in the states or western europe should object to eastern european immigration. they (eastern europeans) have a well educated workforce, thanks to the communist school system and are willing to work blue collar jobs like hispanics and others.

QuietWind
Saturday, August 6th, 2005, 04:43 PM
Thus the problem is our supposedly high IQ. Instead of practical education; theoretical. Why not import educated and, often experienced, doctors and industrial workers then?


When these types of people come to America, they end up working in gas stations or McDonalds. For example, thereis a woman who works at McDonalds here in Texas that was a Scientist of some sort back in Russia. This one Ob/GYN in Texas had to first immigrate to England, gain a second Medical degree, and then come to America because his degree from Pakistan wouldn't carry over. Alot of it depends on which country they come from. America is so capitalistic that everything is about money. A licensed day care director in one state must obtain a new license and meet new state licesing requirements when they changes states. Teachers are the same. Being certified to teach in one state doesn't mean you are certified in other states. You can be a licensed Psychologist in one state, move to another and......same thing-- you have to re-meet that states requirements and get a new license. It's all about the money. I am qualified to teach at a community college level, but I am unable to get a HighSchool teacher's certification unless I were to take another 2 years of coursework at a community college-- which I have no intention of doing. They just want the money.

simplex
Saturday, August 6th, 2005, 07:18 PM
As a teenager myself, I find my friends and I do plenty of service jobs. Even if there was a labor shortage, we should just allow small-offending prisoners to have a chance to do jobs they might not do otherwise. I don't know what laws are where you live, but one can do 40 hours of community service instead of jail time here.

RedJack
Sunday, August 7th, 2005, 03:55 AM
I think SouthernBoy nailed it. Ironically, immigrants are said to take the jobs that the natives "won't" do, but in reality are offered government grants to set themselves up as shopkeepers, etc. :thumbdown

Glenlivet
Monday, August 8th, 2005, 01:23 AM
It is no different in most of Europe. Immigrants can be higher educated, but they are willing to take lower paid jobs (taxi driver is common, which is not really low paid). To Deling I can say that Sweden already imported doctors, e.g. from Poland. There are enough people that apply to medicine. You need the highest grade possible to get in. It is not only about theoretical education, because if you want to talk about natural science, Sweden is behind many third world countries where they are harder on the kids from an early age.

On social workers, socialist "democracies" have enough of those. :D

Yes, workers are needed, but how can the system really work if they almost earn more than someone who studied 3-4.5 years at university? Let's face the truth, Sweden is semi-Communist. Upper class kids do not study as much. They do simple (not that they need to be for everyone, and you do better at something you like) subjects, like history of art, which would probably be useless and not lead to a job if you do not have the right contacts. I know what I talk about here, because I met many such cases among sloanes in south-east England. They also study at certain universities. Young middle class people need to study long so they can later make some good money. Those people will not do well in a Socialist society. The intellectuals are not always the ones in the upper class, they are more often middle or even lower middle class in background.

But Marxist do not recognise a middle class. We all have desires and ambitions, but only to a certain level, restricted by how our parents can (and are willing to) help us, and of course, the system we live in also play a large role.

Students aim for subjects they feel are more simple. That is not always bad. Some programs or courses that are seen as difficult may not lead to a job (e.g. computer science, after the IT crash). There are vocational schools that often lead to a job. I do not know how it is where you live though.

I think that we need to define (or rather redefine) the meaning of success.


When these types of people come to America, they end up working in gas stations or McDonalds. For example, thereis a woman who works at McDonalds here in Texas that was a Scientist of some sort back in Russia.

Northern Paladin
Monday, August 8th, 2005, 02:22 AM
Sweden needs Immigration and Economic reform if it's economy is to become competitive. The social welfare system is a short changing Swedes. They're tax money is going to feed people who can't or wouldn't work.

Deling
Monday, August 8th, 2005, 01:54 PM
GLENLIVET: In the bottom end though, I believe the problem is value. Sweden definitely is Socialist, with oligarchs and wannabe-oligarchs who decide the daily fate of the "market" with their stock market speculation and de facto cartel agreements. Sweden may be semi-Communist, but state and 'capital' is woven together in a clan/family-based structure that reminds me more of Saudi Arabia than a democracy of will and merits.

Sometimes I believe the Swedish economy is a bubble, created and carried by the capitalist/Soc-Dem mafia; we, the ordinary Swedes, don't affect anything really (except potentially the implications of Surplus-Demand theory). Is that why our political and economical Establishment is so stable? They carry the whole Swedish economy on their rotten axles, and our people instinctively knows it.

NORTHERN PALADIN Sure! We need reform! I'm a Socialist to my ethos, but I understand economy well enough to see beyond dogmatism. The Swedish problem is that the system can't be reformed! As mentioned earlier, it's the traditional 'bourgeousie' class and the Soc-Dem/Establishment political aristocracy that carry our economy: in this aspect our economy remind of the Soviet one.
To change this we need new values growing from below, that doesn't rely on the State/'Capital' to decide our economical fate for us. That doesn't mean privatization; which is nothing else than hand-switching, the State turns over a sector to the 'Capital' friend.
Essentially, immigrants neither benefit nor degrade the Swedish economy. Thanks to the taxes status quo is almost always reached. The problem for the oligarch-state is that the cleft between people and State/'Capital' is widening, because of the latter's Globalisation. Could the tax pressure still be upheld on the people? The guarantee for the existence of the State/'Capital' system? Not in the long run.
But Sweden isn't alone about this problem, so is many other European nations. That's where EU come into picture; economically a collective attempt by the state-oligarchy of the European nations to uphold its 'welfare-tax' system. I believe they only can prolong its existence though.

The role of immigrants are real-economical: to fill in gaps where there are vacuum in their century-old social structure, now decaying because of their own "want more of the cake"-mentality.

Northern Paladin
Monday, August 8th, 2005, 05:23 PM
NORTHERN PALADIN Sure! We need reform! I'm a Socialist to my ethos, but I understand economy well enough to see beyond dogmatism. The Swedish problem is that the system can't be reformed! As mentioned earlier, it's the traditional 'bourgeousie' class and the Soc-Dem/Establishment political aristocracy that carry our economy: in this aspect our economy remind of the Soviet one.
To change this we need new values growing from below, that doesn't rely on the State/'Capital' to decide our economical fate for us. That doesn't mean privatization; which is nothing else than hand-switching, the State turns over a sector to the 'Capital' friend.
Essentially, immigrants neither benefit nor degrade the Swedish economy. Thanks to the taxes status quo is almost always reached. The problem for the oligarch-state is that the cleft between people and State/'Capital' is widening, because of the latter's Globalisation. Could the tax pressure still be upheld on the people? The guarantee for the existence of the State/'Capital' system? Not in the long run.
But Sweden isn't alone about this problem, so is many other European nations. That's where EU come into picture; economically a collective attempt by the state-oligarchy of the European nations to uphold its 'welfare-tax' system. I believe they only can prolong its existence though.

The role of immigrants are real-economical: to fill in gaps where there are vacuum in their century-old social structure, now decaying because of their own "want more of the cake"-mentality.

What I'm saying is the Swedish economy is hurting because of the welfare system, and immigration policies.

The immigration system in Sweden is such a way that they are taking in way more Asylum seekers who have no potential to help the economy. They are simply taking and not giving. Many immigrants don't work or go to College they rely on government handouts at the cost of productive workers. Which in turn makes high taxes and high prices which stiffles the Swedish economy.

Especially in regards to small businesses. The taxes are too high for them to exist let alone prosper and as a result fewer jobs are being generated. Much of the growth in America has been generated by small businesses.

I think Sweden would benefit immenesely if they switched to an American free market system. Forget the social welfare let people who can work and be prosperous. Let those who can't perish. Spoon feeding the handicap is pointless if it means hurting the majority who are able bodied.

I believe if Sweden doesn't face it's problems and reform. Reform will come on it's own.

Susisaari
Tuesday, August 9th, 2005, 10:06 PM
America is so capitalistic that everything is about money. A licensed day care director in one state must obtain a new license and meet new state licesing requirements when they changes states. Teachers are the same. Being certified to teach in one state doesn't mean you are certified in other states.


This has nothing do with capitalism. Government regulations are basically socialism, not capitalism.

Deling
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 01:03 AM
"What I'm saying is the Swedish economy is hurting because of the welfare system, and immigration policies."

This isn't what I'm saying. Sweden is hurt because of those who steer the economy; and to them the economy isn't hurting. They are the offical economy.

"The immigration system in Sweden is such a way that they are taking in way more Asylum seekers who have no potential to help the economy. They are simply taking and not giving."

Sure. But the problem with Sweden's economical soul is that persons, the state/'Capital' oligarchy, is the economy de facto. Our economy is to benefit these blood-suckers: this is the main problem.

"Many immigrants don't work or go to College they rely on government handouts at the cost of productive workers. Which in turn makes high taxes and high prices which stiffles the Swedish economy."

Sweden has always had very high taxes, regardless of immigrants or not. Strangely though, the richest vampires always get richer, just as the political aristocracy. But then you have to realize that the welfare state of Sweden was created by the STATE and the CAPITAL together, and it's to their benefit. That's why I claim they ARE, and I know they believe so, the economy embodied. Immigrants are just a symptom, at most.

"Especially in regards to small businesses. The taxes are too high for them to exist let alone prosper and as a result fewer jobs are being generated. Much of the growth in America has been generated by small businesses."

Of course, small companies have many (and high) taxes. But why would the blood-sucker coalition care? They are already on dry land. The only reason they may be worried is the socio-political situation: that they'll lose the support of the population for their theft. Rest is realpolitical, and self-serving.

"I think Sweden would benefit immenesely if they switched to an American free market system. Forget the social welfare let people who can work and be prosperous. Let those who can't perish. Spoon feeding the handicap is pointless if it means hurting the majority who are able bodied."

Well, I had no idea USA was a freemarket state. Honestly I believe that Sweden is much more "free market" (in the classical, political economical sense) than USA.

However, just as in America our "free market" is solely for benefit to blood-suckers. Look at Britain! When the ticks felt that welfare couldn't give more blood, they started "privatizing" (and at the same time strengthening the state; free market liberalism in it's 20th/21th Century form is, and will be, authoritarian) campaigns to suck a little more. The same in Sweden: free-market/Socialism...the switch from the latter to the former began around 1990, and everyone, from the financial oligarchy to the political aristocracy approved it: the old system was reformed in the name of "growth", "the New Vision", "corporate rule". WHAT system doesn't matter, but WHO benefit. The only reason Sweden MAY need an "american free-market system" (whatever that is) is that it creates more blood-sucked and perhaps political radicalism.

" I believe if Sweden doesn't face it's problems and reform. Reform will come on it's own."

Nah, our reforms came 1990, and it didn't change anything. The economical problem of Sweden (and all the Western democracies) are that the welfare state created the tool for the State/'Capital' to suck blood, and if that doesn't work; just "reform".
Reform come from people; either from the oligarchy or from people below.

Northern Paladin
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 01:32 AM
"What I'm saying is the Swedish economy is hurting because of the welfare system, and immigration policies."

This isn't what I'm saying. Sweden is hurt because of those who steer the economy; and to them the economy isn't hurting. They are the offical economy.

"The immigration system in Sweden is such a way that they are taking in way more Asylum seekers who have no potential to help the economy. They are simply taking and not giving."



Yeah I know what you mean a Swedish friend of mine says the Social Democrats are hiding unemployment figures. He says they are likely in the 10% range.

But I also heard Sweden is trying to do some kind of reform on their Welfare System. Maybe kinda of like Regan welfare reform that is you have to show you are looking for a job. However I think its still far from fool proof.

Sure. But the problem with Sweden's economical soul is that persons, the state/'Capital' oligarchy, is the economy de facto. Our economy is to benefit these blood-suckers: this is the main problem.

I see. In Sweden the Economy is fabricated by the Politicians. And I'm guessing the general public is oblivious to this? Or if it isn't they are apathetic?

What is Idealo-Vexocrat Neo-Hobbesian?

Deling
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 02:43 AM
"Yeah I know what you mean a Swedish friend of mine says the Social Democrats are hiding unemployment figures. He says they are likely in the 10% range."

Likely is wrong. They sure are. But "our" corporations do just fine, just as the big stock holders, so our economy can't be declining then... :P

"But I also heard Sweden is trying to do some kind of reform on their Welfare System. Maybe kinda of like Regan welfare reform that is you have to show you are looking for a job. However I think its still far from fool proof."

I don't know anything about reforms, but I doubt it: welfare is the "bread and peace" that keep the population in place. To get welfare one have to look for job, of course. I don't know about over there, in the USA, but going to the social services and get a few thousand kronor every month isn't such a big deal. Most people I can think of, including me, has lived on it from time to time.

"I see. In Sweden the Economy is fabricated by the Politicians. And I'm guessing the general public is oblivious to this? Or if it isn't they are apathetic?"

I believe we, the nation, doesn't control our economies anymore. I believe America is even more "fabricated" than Sweden. Between 1994-2000 USA had a growth of 40% total. Year 2000 the American industry's share on GDP was 15,9%. 19,6% was finance/insurance/property (that is: speculation). 21,9% Personal services.

What's wrong with figures like these? Over-valuation a la Enron and moving/buying/selling stock options make up one-fifth of the American GDP. What power do the average American, Swede, Japanese, Italian have over economy nowadays? None. The economy isn't even depend on whether we work or not anymore, just as long as the global cyber-economy where VALUE is 0-1's on computer screens and the benefactors of that system do well; then there's no need for either employment, trade unions or national competition. Hell, all elites, from China to Canada to Chile to Czech Republic are in on it. Preserve eachothers' oligarchy, "Hey, Mr. Rise-Eater! We move factories to you, you buy lots of Dollar and state bonds to subsidise American 'economy' (state)!!" ... "Hey, Mr. Nigger! We give you many millions to build roads and dig wells in your country, just hire THIS company for the contract so our growth looks better -- plus you're doing my corporate friends a favor."

There can't be National-Revolution if one doesn't understand that some classes of today must be eliminated, otherwise there won't be any change in depth. Economical revolution must come from below, cutting of the viper's head.

"What is Idealo-Vexocrat Neo-Hobbesian?"

Nothing..haha.. I wrote that because I was tired of all people who in "Ideology" had written all sorts of political contradictions and b-s, "Anarcho-Fascist Libertarian" and such. You get the point ;)

Northern Paladin
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 02:51 AM
"But I also heard Sweden is trying to do some kind of reform on their Welfare System. Maybe kinda of like Regan welfare reform that is you have to show you are looking for a job. However I think its still far from fool proof."[/B]

I don't know anything about reforms, but I doubt it: welfare is the "bread and peace" that keep the population in place. To get welfare one have to look for job, of course. I don't know about over there, in the USA, but going to the social services and get a few thousand kronor every month isn't such a big deal. Most people I can think of, including me, has lived on it from time to time.
"I see. In Sweden the Economy is fabricated by the Politicians. And I'm guessing the general public is oblivious to this? Or if it isn't they are apathetic?"

I believe we, the nation, doesn't control our economies anymore. I believe America is even more "fabricated" than Sweden. Between 1994-2000 USA had a growth of 40% total. Year 2000 the American industry's share on GDP was 15,9%. 19,6% was finance/insurance/property (that is: speculation). 21,9% Personal services.

What's wrong with figures like these? Over-valuation a la Enron and moving/buying/selling stock options make up one-fifth of the American GDP. What power do the average American, Swede, Japanese, Italian have over economy nowadays? None. The economy isn't even depend on whether we work or not anymore, just as long as the global cyber-economy where VALUE is 0-1's on computer screens and the benefactors of that system do well; then there's no need for either employment, trade unions or national competition. Hell, all elites, from China to Canada to Chile to Czech Republic are in on it. Preserve eachothers' oligarchy, "Hey, Mr. Rise-Eater! We move factories to you, you buy lots of Dollar and state bonds to subsidise American 'economy' (state)!!" ... "Hey, Mr. Nigger! We give you many millions to build roads and dig wells in your country, just hire THIS company for the contract so our growth looks better -- plus you're doing my corporate friends a favor."

There can't be National-Revolution if one doesn't understand that some classes of today must be eliminated, otherwise there won't be any change in depth. Economical revolution must come from below, cutting of the viper's head.


Numbers can be faked. But if you fake it enough people will know.

QuietWind
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 03:12 AM
This has nothing do with capitalism. Government regulations are basically socialism, not capitalism. It is capitalistic because it is about the money. You must pay for a new license for every state and the requirements vary from state to state so that often times it's the colleges making money. This is not socialism at all. When a state requires a day care director to have specific courses that are only offered through the local University of that state, it's all about the money. (Depending on the state and the type of University also depends how the State University recieves funding from the state. Sometimes it is based on their enrollment numbers. More people taking frivolous courses equals more money for the University. )When the state is not the one giving out teacher's certifications, but it is the Colleges and Universities who are the ones doing so-- that is capitalism, not socialism. I can tell you, it isn't the government who is making the money and running the show, it's the Universities. And it is not the government who dictates to the Universities, it's accrediting agencies. And it is not the government who dictates to the accrediting agencies either.

Tell me how this is socialistic and not capitalistic.

SC-Mann
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 04:07 AM
If they aren't benefiting the economy then where and WHY are all the jobs going? Why is our industrial and manufacturing base being shipped out, along with millions of migrant workers flooding in to take the few remaining domestic jobs? The international corporations are totally in line with this insane border/immigration policy, and they are making a FORTUNE off of it. Tyson Chicken, Home Depot, Wal Mart - just to name a FEW of the many companies that hire illegals in this country. In many cases they pick them up right at the border.

This doesn't mean its a good thing, but facts are facts - they are benefiting the globalist free trade economy. Or if you want to be picky, lets just say they are benefiting and are a key attribute to these corporations' increased earnings. Even in Europe you have textiles, electronics, manufacturing, automobile companies etc. being shipped to the Far East while immigrant labor comes to fill the positions of these domestic companies. And once these companies arrive in their new locations, cheap materials and low wages = increased profit, while at the same time making Western consumers completely subservient to their markets. You nor I matter in their internationalized economy, only maximizing profits is of concern.

Really if any of you have read Might Is Right you can apply this to the economic world. There is no morality, no code of ethics, just the struggle to succeed and to succeed BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE. It is a biological law made applicable to their corporate strategy. But one thing they are going against regarding biological and evolutionary law is the protection and survival of your own. Concluding, they can be described as international determinists with no loyalty, or for that matter the desire for productive survival and advancement of one's own kind.

Northern Paladin
Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, 02:35 PM
If they aren't benefiting the economy then where and WHY are all the jobs going? Why is our industrial and manufacturing base being shipped out, along with millions of migrant workers flooding in to take the few remaining domestic jobs? The international corporations are totally in line with this insane border/immigration policy, and they are making a FORTUNE off of it. Tyson Chicken, Home Depot, Wal Mart - just to name a FEW of the many companies that hire illegals in this country. In many cases they pick them up right at the border.

This doesn't mean its a good thing, but facts are facts - they are benefiting the globalist free trade economy. Or if you want to be picky, lets just say they are benefiting and are a key attribute to these corporations' increased earnings. Even in Europe you have textiles, electronics, manufacturing, automobile companies etc. being shipped to the Far East while immigrant labor comes to fill the positions of these domestic companies. And once these companies arrive in their new locations, cheap materials and low wages = increased profit, while at the same time making Western consumers completely subservient to their markets. You nor I matter in their internationalized economy, only maximizing profits is of concern.

Really if any of you have read Might Is Right you can apply this to the economic world. There is no morality, no code of ethics, just the struggle to succeed and to succeed BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE. It is a biological law made applicable to their corporate strategy. But one thing they are going against regarding biological and evolutionary law is the protection and survival of your own. Concluding, they can be described as international determinists with no loyalty, or for that matter the desire for productive survival and advancement of one's own kind.

Yeah they are benefiting coporations and by doing so are benefiting the economy. Immigrants taking away white jobs isn't a big problem. But Immigrants changing the Character of America is.

Alizon Device
Thursday, August 11th, 2005, 09:26 PM
Our media and Government in the UK stress the advantages of immigration, in terms of the new arrivals filling unwanted job vacancies, and in turn paying taxes.

I believe what they pay in tax is far outweighed by their demands on the Health Service, Housing, Pension Fund, School places and cost of processing their residence applications.
And these are the purely financial reasons why I find them undesirable.

More importantly, the vast majority of legal and illegal immigrants who come to Europe (especially Britain) come from an alien culture (mainly Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Somalia, Zimbabwe and the Congo at the moment), and this is already causing problems in cities across the land.

Susisaari
Wednesday, August 17th, 2005, 01:52 PM
It is capitalistic because it is about the money.


So the USSR was a capitalist country according to your terminology, because there was money in the Soviet economy.



You must pay for a new license for every state and the requirements vary from state to state so that often times it's the colleges making money. This is not socialism at all. When a state requires a day care director to have specific courses that are only offered through the local University of that state, it's all about the money. (Depending on the state and the type of University also depends how the State University recieves funding from the state. Sometimes it is based on their enrollment numbers. More people taking frivolous courses equals more money for the University. )When the state is not the one giving out teacher's certifications, but it is the Colleges and Universities who are the ones doing so-- that is capitalism, not socialism. I can tell you, it isn't the government who is making the money and running the show, it's the Universities. And it is not the government who dictates to the Universities, it's accrediting agencies. And it is not the government who dictates to the accrediting agencies either.

Tell me how this is socialistic and not capitalistic.


Capitalism = private ownership & market economy
Socialism = government ownership & planned economy & regulations

It's irrelevant that "it isn't the government who is making the money and running the show, it's the Universities". The regulations are government regulations, and the universities are funded by the government.

Don't tell me some universities are private, and the students have to pay for tuition. The government funds the universities anyway. Government spending on universities and other schools is higher per capita in the USA than in most European "welfare states". The belief that the USA is a capitalist country and that European countries are more "socialistic" is erroneous.

Rachel
Thursday, August 18th, 2005, 04:52 AM
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=5682

Does anyone know the proportionality of jobs created in America compared to those sent overseas?

"Not a single one of these jobs produces a tradable good or service that can be exported or serve as an import substitute to help reduce the massive and growing US trade deficit. The US economy is employing people to sell things, to move people around, and to serve them fast food and alcoholic beverages. The items may have an American brand name, but they are mainly made off shore. For example, 70% of Wal-Mart’s goods are made in China."

This is an interesting point. It seems as though a shift towards low productivity jobs is the focus, with qualifications benefiting those whom are under qualified? What an economic nightmare. Being anything short of an expert, does anyone care to elaborate?

Northern Paladin
Thursday, August 18th, 2005, 02:31 PM
[QUOTE=Rachel]http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=5682

Does anyone know the proportionality of jobs created in America compared to those sent overseas?

To export jobs overseas is probably the best thing to do from an Economic standpoint. Unemployment figures are only 5%. http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm

Rachel
Thursday, August 18th, 2005, 07:37 PM
Is it true that those counted as unemployed, are only on unemployment for a certain number of weeks, and if they haven't found of job within a certain amount of time, they are put into a different category - "not in labor force"? How does say homlessness and welfare figure in?

Article by Kevin Strom dealing with the American economy and wealth transfer www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=3313 (http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=3313)

Northern Paladin
Thursday, August 18th, 2005, 08:12 PM
The biggest thing we have to worry about is high energy prices.

Rollon
Thursday, August 18th, 2005, 10:17 PM
The most conspicuous impact of immigrant labor on a national market is that it keeps the wages low.

Requiem
Saturday, August 20th, 2005, 03:32 AM
The drive for money over all, at least from what I have gathered, is deemed a capitalist concept. When people see that factory jobs recieve less pay than a scientist, a capitalist society will automatically rank the jobs accordingly.

How exactly should we combat this, and should we even try it?

A self-sufficient economy would have a majority of working class citizens, instead of relying on China. Should the intellectual related workers view themselves at the same level as these workers? Factory type jobs are extremely important, but require less intelligence and thought. How should a person justify giving more money to the scientist than the worker? I am just spilling out things I think of in an effort to properly form some idea of a good NS economy in my mind.

Susisaari
Monday, August 22nd, 2005, 04:00 PM
The most conspicuous impact of immigrant labor on a national market is that it keeps the wages low.

Nominal wages aren't important, real wages are. If wages fall 10% and prices fall 20%, real wages have risen.

Whether immigrants benefit the economy or not depends on the type of immigrants. I'm sure that Scandinavian and German immigrants benefited the American economy in the 19th and 20th centuries. I'm sure that African immigrants don't benefit the European economy in the 21st century, because they are lazy, criminal, stupid, unemployed, on welfare etc.

Glenlivet
Monday, August 22nd, 2005, 09:24 PM
They energy prices will probably stay the same or increase. I cannot see the price of crude oil going down.

The living standard in India is rising and they use more and more energy. Today was the first time that I saw a unit trust (mutual fund) with only Indian companies.

"What is behind the recent spike in crude-oil prices?

Analysts place most of the onus for the sharp increase on booming demand from China and India. China, where car sales are increasing 20% per year, saw demand grow in 2004 by 5.8 million barrels a day to 20 million barrels a day, placing it second in consumption behind the U.S. Furthermore, Asia’s demand in 2004 accounted for 3.3% of the rise in world demand."

http://www.puertorico-herald.org/issues2/2005/vol09n19/CBRisingOil.shtml

We should think of alternative energy sources.


The biggest thing we have to worry about is high energy prices.

Weg
Monday, August 22nd, 2005, 09:41 PM
Ho yes, immigrants are "benefiting" western economies, but the underground ones economies.

Hugin
Saturday, August 27th, 2005, 09:36 AM
I donīt think so cause in the last year there was a study from the Netherlands about the benefit of immigrants.They said that immigrantes are expensive for a long time (sometimes about trhee or four generations).So it isnīt a benefit for a society to hold mbillions of immigrantes but for the economy it is maybe a benefit.The donīt must pay the money for "intigration",crime and son on.

Rollon
Saturday, August 27th, 2005, 12:12 PM
Not to mention the negative externalities, such as the fact that immigrants stink, talk loud in their hideous inferior languages, are ugly and as such represent a suffering for aesthetes, that they are fanatic Muslims or Chinese members of the fifth column, that they talk bad to our girls, that they look like a degenerate brand of humanity...

All this represents a net loss of welfare for our societies, and it must be taken into account by economists.

Weg
Saturday, August 27th, 2005, 12:40 PM
They're mostly coming from very poor and under developed countries, they're themselves of poor background without any education nor skills. I don't see how they could be a benefit for us. And even if they were really benefiting our economies, we shouldn't let them come.

Oskorei
Saturday, August 27th, 2005, 12:52 PM
I donīt think so cause in the last year there was a study from the Netherlands about the benefit of immigrants.They said that immigrantes are expensive for a long time (sometimes about trhee or four generations).So it isnīt a benefit for a society to hold mbillions of immigrantes but for the economy it is maybe a benefit.The donīt must pay the money for "intigration",crime and son on.

In Sweden there has been a study by a Lars Jansson that concludes that the cost of immigration for society is 267 Billion Swedish Kronor annually (about 30 Billion US$), that is something like 1/4 of the annual budget of the State. They cost a lot....

http://www.svd.se/dynamiskt/Brannpunkt/did_2577372.asp
(in Swedish)

Rollon
Tuesday, August 30th, 2005, 12:24 PM
Nominal wages aren't important, real wages are. If wages fall 10% and prices fall 20%, real wages have risen.

Immigrants keep labor supply high. So, all other things remaining equal, immigration lower average wages.

Susisaari
Tuesday, August 30th, 2005, 02:51 PM
Immigrants keep labor supply high. So, all other things remaining equal, immigration lower average wages.

So, you're saying America would be richer than it is today if nobody had ever moved there after 1492?

Like I said:
Whether immigrants benefit the economy or not depends on the type of immigrants. I'm sure that Scandinavian and German immigrants benefited the American economy in the 19th and 20th centuries. I'm sure that African immigrants don't benefit the European economy in the 21st century, because they are lazy, criminal, stupid, unemployed, on welfare etc.

Rollon
Wednesday, August 31st, 2005, 02:34 PM
So, you're saying America would be richer than it is today if nobody had ever moved there after 1492?

Like I said:
Whether immigrants benefit the economy or not depends on the type of immigrants. I'm sure that Scandinavian and German immigrants benefited the American economy in the 19th and 20th centuries. I'm sure that African immigrants don't benefit the European economy in the 21st century, because they are lazy, criminal, stupid, unemployed, on welfare etc.

I'm not saying the contrary; I just go step by step. Once one understands that an increase in labor supply from immigration leads to a decrease in wages, one can look at the other effects of immigration.

Hard-working or efficient people increase the productivity of an economy, as the Nordic and Germanic immigrants did, in the US or anywhere else; so the decrease in wages is soon more than counterbalanced.

Now take the average Dark coming in US or EU today, and one sees that the negative effect of such immigration will become ever worse as time passes by.

fms panzerfaust
Wednesday, August 31st, 2005, 08:15 PM
Some months ago I send a e-mail to a guy that have a contact with the embassy of Sweden and have a website with courses of the swedish language, and when I ask him about imigration policies, he answers to me that dont exist emigration to Sweden.