159
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
159 points (89.6% liked)
World News
32365 readers
306 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Immigration absolutely helps the US economy, because it parasitically siphons all the skilled workers out of other countries that it underdevelops and hoards their labor for itself.
People think remittances help underdeveloped countries, but labor is the superior of capital, losing that skilled labor is never worth the paltry sums that get sent back home. It's just another shape that imperialism takes.
In Canada we heavily base immigration on education. So we're siphoning off the best educated of other countries. I mean this is just fucking those countries.
I get what you two are saying, but this kind of removes agency from the people doing the moving.
Also: Should people not be allowed to move to another country if they’re “too useful” or “skilled”?
There's no agency in the market. That's the entire point of markets - being independent of a single human's whims and being an equalizing force, the "invisible hand".
And the entire point of communism is getting that agency, having production for the sake of humans rather than humans for the sake of production.
I think you have lost the thread here tbh
No, migration is caused by economics, so it only makes sense to use economics to talk about it. In capitalism, migration follows the market laws, i.e. people migrating to where they expect to be paid more.
I took basic Econ. My point is decisions are multi-faceted. We are not all slaves of the invisible hand 24/7 as it guides our every single decision.
Idk about everyone else, but I think the issue is something like the "oh so you hate capitalism but participate in it?" meme.
An argument for agency can be made either for or against, but for most it boils down to the reality of the society you're trying to exist in. It's just a huge distraction that you've created along with others for anecdotal conversations. This is a US sitting democratic president calling insults to allies during a time-period where conflict is on the rise, while completely negating any resolutions that could impede the death being caused.
We could talk about Biden's own xenophobia with the immigration and border response. His past with the crime bill and other negative legislation. The fact that the entire Democratic Party is xenophobic to anyone outside of their party including the "poor" or progressive strangers they fear so much, like we saw with the recent condemnation of the protests against Palestinian genocide.
Instead you've made 10+ comments bringing up other countries to blame, links back to other comments in this thread, boasting about taking a basic Econ class and proclaiming you've won because a couple of people upvoted you. I understand your argument, it's just not valid at this time or during this discussion and you're trying to force it with hostility till people "get it".
I am not forcing it with hostility. I made a broader point about treating people like pawns on a board and I got lectured about econ 101. Yeah I got a little snippy with them, sure I could've not been that way. But these responses are so absurd, they leave no nuance or middleground and keep telling me I am either saying things I didn't say or put up a lazy strawman as if it responds to what I said.
Also notice not one person wants to acknowledge that there is this implication people have some obligation to not leave their country as it means they are participating in "brain drain."
I get what you're saying, I really do. But the fact is people got all prickly when I tried to introduce nuance. Of course economic factors heavily drive our decisions. I'm not sure where I said anything remotely to the contrary, so I'm getting irritated.
There's an issue without you saying not because you don't know econ 101, but because you do know it. Because you shift the focus from the systems (global imperialism) to the individuals ("so you shouldn't be allowed to migrate?"). What causes migration is, objectively, unequal development of different countries caused by imperialism and inherent to the market system, and not "personal decisions". That means shifting the talk to "personal decisions" is pointless and harmful.
It's like going "oh but you voluntarily choose to buy/sell" and blaming all your economic problems on yourself.
I didn’t shift it. I introduced nuance. Nothing I said denied the impact of imperialism/economic realities. Show me where I said anything like that. I have written several responses that clearly indicate I know those are major factors. At this point responses like yours just mean you are choosing to deliberately misinterpret what I wrote/put words in my mouth and that you are ignoring anything else I wrote that could possibly clarify the situation.
Feels like I’m back on Reddit with this nonsense.