Democratic Presidential Debate

[xerx]

Economic growth kept pace with (or exceeded) population growth, so it wasn't true then. This has no longer been the case.

Then why is population growth the cause of economic stagnation??

Or, liberty to live away from people that don't improve one's quality of life. Dunno about you, but hearing clown polka mariachi music at 2AM is a 'liberty' I can live without.


Open borders socialize an entire country into the world's public toilet.

The only coherent libertarian position would be privatized borders. Expanding the franchise of democracy so more people can vote against your interests doesn't make sense.

Hey, change the channel if you don't like what's on TV. You have the freedom to live in a gated community / safe space and censor the presence of Mexicans (and presumably Black people). I have the right to trade as much saliva as I want with shaved or unshaved Mexican pussy.

[mfckrz]

Then why is population growth the cause of economic stagnation??

Basic supply&demand??

Increasing labor supply without a commensurate increase in economic output means no wage growth.

No wage growth + rising costs of living → less savings. And no more middle class. Less savings → less investment, ergo ↓ economic growth.

Consider that there'd have never been a Renaissance without the Black Death. Because rising wages in the aftermath of the plague allowed for the emergence of a middle class and greatly disrupted the wealthy feudal hierarchies who'd been riding high on a mass of cheap labor prior.

With socioeconomic mobility from large numbers of people who can actually save, invest, and own assets… culture tends to follow. Same dynamics can be observed in civilizations of antiquity.

Hey, change the channel if you don't like what's on TV. You have the freedom to live in a gated community / safe space and censor the presence of Mexicans (and presumably Black people).

Where I live is fine. But resent being forced to take out a $500,000+ mortgage just to live in a decent area because the govt opened the floodgates to let all this in.

[xerx]

Basic supply&demand??

Increasing labor supply without a commensurate increase in economic output means no wage growth.

No wage growth + rising costs of living → less savings. And no more middle class. Less savings → less investment, ergo ↓ economic growth.

Consider that there'd have never been a Renaissance without the Black Death. Because rising wages in the aftermath of the plague allowed for the emergence of a middle class and greatly disrupted the wealthy feudal hierarchies who'd been riding high on a mass of cheap labor prior.

With socioeconomic mobility from large numbers of people who can actually save, invest, and own assets… culture tends to follow. Same dynamics can be observed in civilizations of antiquity.

But there is a commensurate increase in economic output. GDP per capita has grown substantially over the past forty years.

Where I live is fine. But resent being forced to take out a $500,000+ mortgage just to live in a decent area because the govt opened the floodgates to let all this in.

Hey, you have the right to feel whatever you like.

An overlooked fact of women entering the workforce is that doubling labor supply means that wage value was halved. Over time, you needed two incomes to be able to afford a mortgage and bills when one used to be sufficient. I am all for women's rights and freedom to work, but our salaries having half the value they used to have has been devastating to families. Also, a good portion of women (not all of course) resent being forced to work a career to raise a family and would of preferred to be stay at home mom's.

The price we pay for this is women being forced to work a career and raise a family or have your standard of living cut in half. Mass immigration is similar in this regard. We became so fixated in chasing meaningless statistics like GDP growth that we didn't realize how it impacted our quality of life and salaries not growing enough relative to ever increasing living costs.


Very low skilled individuals may lose their jobs to immigration and automation and end up on the streets. While high skilled working class and middle class individuals with careers find their standard of living slowly decrease as salaries cannot keep up to rising costs of living due to inflation. All mass immigration is doing is fueling an ever increasing wage gap difference as wealthy people fill their coffers and reap the benefits and everyday citizens pay the price.

That sounds pretty dramatic; how are you backing it up?

I looked at a meta-study which concludes that a 1% increase in immigration depresses wages by a "quantitatively small" 0.1% (source = https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.n.../PSC-dp-47.pdf). A blog post by the economist Noah Smith goes on to suggest that the wage dip to immigration might even be nonexistent over the long term due to markets returning to equilibrium (source = http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/101ism.html).


As for women, this study here suggests that wages actually rise due to their increased participation in the workforce (source = https://hbr.org/2018/01/when-more-wo...luding-for-men).

[mfckrz]

But there is a commensurate increase in economic output. GDP per capita has grown substantially over the past forty years.

Not difficult to understand.

[xerx]

Not difficult to understand.

We've all seen that. What's your proof that it's the result of overpopulation..? If population growth puts this much downward pressure on wages, why did purchasing power improve between 1900 and 1964?

[mfckrz]

We've all seen that. What's your proof that it's the result of overpopulation..?

The numbers have already been run before: https://cis.org/Report/Immigration-and-American-Worker

Total GDP of course rises from immigration—but nearly all the gains go to firms (i.e., the wealthy) or to the immigrants themselves:


Everyone else loses. Little wonder that income inequality has been surging with massive gains going to the top 0.1% and above.

If population growth puts this much downward pressure on wages, why did purchasing power improve between 1900 and 1964?

Probably because the US was still something of a developing country, and we weren't letting in crazy amounts of people like now:


Quite the inflection point circa ~1970. Maybe a little too coincidental with post-1964 wage stagnation.

[xerx]

The numbers have already been run before: https://cis.org/Report/Immigration-and-American-Worker

Total GDP of course rises from immigration—but nearly all the gains go to firms (i.e., the wealthy) or to the immigrants themselves:


Everyone else loses. Little wonder that income inequality has been surging with massive gains going to the top 0.1% and above.

The bolded part is the devil you're looking for. The reason firms take most of the gains has to do with class inequality; there are any number of possibilities as to why this exists, which deserve a thread of their own, but shutting down immigration won't get rich people to start giving a shit about the common man. At best, it'll be a feel-good exercise that ends in complete disappointment... kind of like electing Donald Trump.

Probably because the US was still something of a developing country, and we weren't letting in crazy amounts of people like now:


Quite the inflection point circa ~1970. Maybe a little too coincidental with post-1964 wage stagnation.

According to that chart, the proportion of immigrants was higher between the 1860s and 1910s than it is today, and much higher than it was during the 70s-80s when real incomes were beginning to stagnate. If immigrants are indeed the driving force behind stagnation, that chart has to be one of the worst pieces of evidence for it.