News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Immigration Reform not happening under Obama

Started by Faeelin, October 14, 2009, 02:40:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Valmy

Quote from: Barrister on October 15, 2009, 02:53:03 PM
Comparing India and the US is pretty tricky, since India is still only a developing country, and is a country with no real history or experience with immigration.

Well they did get lots of Arab, Mughal, and British immigrants in the past.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Berkut

Quote from: Barrister on October 15, 2009, 02:53:03 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 15, 2009, 02:50:47 PM
So you are saying that India can absorb 3 times as much immigration as the US, since they have 3x as many people?

Comparing India and the US is pretty tricky, since India is still only a developing country, and is a country with no real history or experience with immigration.

ZOMG! Ar eyou saying there are other variable sinvolved other than total population!

QuoteComparing Canada, Australia, and the US is fairly straightforward however.

How so? Tell me BB, what other variables are involved in how much a country should allow to immigrate, such that we can determine that despite the fact that the US immigration rate is some 4 or 5 times that of Canada, we are actually somehow deficient, in comparison?

How about historical immigration, and how much of a load the country is currently managing as a result right now? How about availability of work? Availability of places to live? Social infrastructure to hold immigrants? Simple space? Educational opportunity?

Do any of those matter compared to the simple measure of total population?
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Slargos

How about you assholes take your fair share of the "asylumseekers" you are creating with your policy of bombing places to shit.

2004-2008 saw Sweden receive around 18/1000 whereas the number for the US was around 1.

Berkut

Quote from: Barrister on October 15, 2009, 02:55:00 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 15, 2009, 02:52:24 PM
The rate at which people immigrate into other countries, or the amount that a country should allow to immigrate is NOT a function of the number of people already there. Obviously. In fact, it is completely independent.

I would agree with Minsky's post directly above yours.  Immigration is fairly closely tied to the overall population, although the correlation is not perfect.  To say that immigration and tht total population are "completely independent" is, well, wrong.

They are completely independent in the sense that Malthus compared it to death rate - in that the death rate is a direct function of the number of people, and immigration is most certainly not.

For example, China has a net negative immigration rate. If in fact they were not "completely independent" variables, that would be impossible. It is entirely possible to have any level of positive and negative migration no matter what your population is - it is not possible to have a greater population while having less total number of people dieing, barring some rather weird external factors.

So sorry, you are wrong again. Immigration rate is certainly "completely independent" from total population - knowing a countries total population tells you nothing about its net immigration rate.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Eddie Teach

Quote from: Slargos on October 15, 2009, 03:01:15 PM
How about you assholes take your fair share of the "asylumseekers" you are creating with your policy of bombing places to shit.

2004-2008 saw Sweden receive around 18/1000 whereas the number for the US was around 1.

Take them or don't take them, no concern of ours. :mellow:
To sleep, perchance to dream. But in that sleep of death, what dreams may come?

The Minsky Moment

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 15, 2009, 02:52:49 PM

We're 25th out of 181. I think it's fair to say we have a high immigration rate. (Australia and Canada are 15th and 18th).

Not a bit surprised that UAE is leading the list.

Let's say you exclude the island-city-states and microstates and Afghanistan (which is probably counting aid workers as "immigrants").  then the rank is:

1) UAE 
2) Kuwait 
3) Australia
4) Jordan
5) Canada
6) Liberia
7) Ireland
8) US
9) Bosnia
10) Portugal

Of this group UAE and Kuwait are basically gastarbeiter economies on a grand scale and don't really bother integrating their migrants.  Jordan is probably capturing political and economic refugees from Iraq.  Liberia is probably capturing a recent infusion of aid workers and probably some diasporic return after decades of civil war.  Bosnia same thing.

That leaves the "immigrant countries" as Australia, Canada, US, Ireland, Portugal(?!)
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Berkut

Quote from: Slargos on October 15, 2009, 03:01:15 PM
How about you assholes take your fair share of the "asylumseekers" you are creating with your policy of bombing places to shit.

2004-2008 saw Sweden receive around 18/1000 whereas the number for the US was around 1.

QuoteSince World War II, more refugees have found homes in the U.S. than any other nation and more than two million refugees have arrived in the U.S. since 1980. Of the top ten countries accepting resettled refugees in 2006, the United States accepted more than twice as many as the next nine countries combined.

Sweden rocks. But you can blow me.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Valmy

Quote from: Berkut on October 15, 2009, 03:00:03 PM
ZOMG! Ar eyou saying there are other variable sinvolved other than total population!

Why are you still arguing about that?  Barrister Boy just conceded that point several posts ago...

You are the guy saying they are COMPLETELY independent, which is idiotic.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Valmy

#83
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 15, 2009, 03:04:16 PM
Portugal(?!)

Latin Americans I presume?

Does the rate of immigration considers immigration of all sorts or just legal documented immigration?  That would make a big difference in this case.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Berkut

Quote from: Valmy on October 15, 2009, 03:06:03 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 15, 2009, 03:00:03 PM
ZOMG! Ar eyou saying there are other variable sinvolved other than total population!

Why are you still arguing about that?  Barrister Boy just conceded that point several posts ago...

You are the guy saying they are COMPLETELY independent, which is idiotic.

Dude, do you know what an independent variable is?

More people != more immigration. It is that simple.

So saying it is just like birth rate, death rate, etc., is false - it is not, since those are dependent variables, whereas total population is an independent variable to immigration.

Hence the claim that "immigration rate" is jsut like those other demographic measures is in fact wrong.

But BB is still arguing that somehow total population is in fact a variable that ought to matter when you compare the immigration rates of different countries, and in fact is the MOST IMPORTANT variable to consider, since he hasn't mentioned any others, and based his apparent claim that the US doesn't really allow much/enough immigration based solely on that single variable.

I claim that is false, and that the US allows more immigration than any other country in the world, and that the raw rate is a much better measure than the per capita rate.

If BB wants to make a decent argument, he might try comparing the US/Canadian immigration rates as a function of GDP - that would at least be comparing a variable that actually matters. Of course, there are a LOT that matter, so picking which ones matter over others is a bit of a challenge, as JR pointed out.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

The Minsky Moment

Immigration/GDP for those three countries is going to track (ordinally) immigration/pop for those 3 countries because they all have similar per capita GDPs.

I still don't see the point in the pissing match because the bottom line is that all 3 countries take in lots of immigrants.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Berkut

Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 15, 2009, 03:15:50 PM
I still don't see the point in the pissing match because the bottom line is that all 3 countries take in lots of immigrants.

Indeed - have to ask BB about that one. Apparently it is really important though, since he was willing to be rather insulting about it.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Ed Anger

Quote from: Slargos on October 15, 2009, 03:01:15 PM
How about you assholes take your fair share of the "asylumseekers" you are creating with your policy of bombing places to shit.

2004-2008 saw Sweden receive around 18/1000 whereas the number for the US was around 1.

BOO HOO.
Stay Alive...Let the Man Drive

derspiess

Quote from: Slargos on October 15, 2009, 03:01:15 PM
How about you assholes take your fair share of the "asylumseekers" you are creating with your policy of bombing places to shit.

2004-2008 saw Sweden receive around 18/1000 whereas the number for the US was around 1.

Would you like our Mexicans?
"If you can play a guitar and harmonica at the same time, like Bob Dylan or Neil Young, you're a genius. But make that extra bit of effort and strap some cymbals to your knees, suddenly people want to get the hell away from you."  --Rich Hall

Ed Anger

Stay Alive...Let the Man Drive