Greg Mankiw has an interesting argument in the New York Times:
First, many economists, especially conservative ones, have a libertarian streak. Ever since Adam Smith taught us about the wonders of free markets and the magic of the invisible hand, we have been loath to prohibit mutually advantageous trades between consenting adults.
…
Second, many economists, especially liberal ones, have an egalitarian streak. They follow the philosopher John Rawls’s theory of justice in believing that policy should be particularly attuned to its impact on the least fortunate. When thinking about immigration, there is little doubt that the least fortunate, and the ones with the most at stake in the outcome, are the poor workers who yearn to come to the United States to make a better life for themselves and their families.
All good – the third argument is controversial – but not for economists.
Third, economists of all stripes recognize that our own profession has benefited greatly from an influx of talent from abroad.
…
The competition from foreign-born economists makes it harder for American economists to get the best positions. But it would be hypocritical for American economists to argue against such competition, as we have long preached that nations are better off over all when they pursue a policy of free and open trade. This principle applies not only to manufactured goods like textiles and aircraft but also to labor services, including lectures on economics.
Ah, open borders…..
Cultural values and compatibility with the Western culture of success matters not…. now it’s merely money and its efficient use.
Good luck comrades, nearly time to move, my taxes will be supporting similar valued people, the 3rd world primitives can eventually modify your country…not mine.
Alfonso
10 Feb 13 at 6:46 pm
I may be looking at this somewhat simplistically, but I see a couple of problems with this. Firstly, it attempts to link justice with “fortune” – or luck – as tho it is immoral for one person to be more lucky than another.
Secondly, it wanders dangerously close to a form of socialism…. Surely a genuine Libertarian position is that, just as an individual should be free to enjoy the advantages of his own property, a group (such as the citizens of a country) should be free to enjoy the advantages of their “common-wealth” as they choose and without being under an obligation to compete again for what they have already gained.
I suggest that if any economist wishes to advocate open borders, he should convince the citizens of that country that it is to their advantage, not merely the advantage of those wishing to enter. The “free market” necessarily includes the freedom to not engage in a particular transaction.
Thirdly, the assumption that limiting the import of people has an equal limitation on the importing of ideas and skills does not appear credible. If – using the example given – there is a market incentive within the US for better economists, then the positions will go to those economists with the best ideas, even if they source those ideas from overseas. The transfer of information may be less efficient, but it will happen if the internal market incentives exist.
PeterW.
10 Feb 13 at 6:49 pm
Yes, damn those 3rd world primitives! Stay out of our civilised countries, swine!
Piett
10 Feb 13 at 6:52 pm
Economics is not always the be all and end all that professional economists believe it to be. In this case it is irrelevant.
Look at the political culture and standard of living south of the border of the USA. If that is how you want the USA to look, then open the border.
Same for Australia. If you want to become part of the Caliphate, open the border.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 6:58 pm
The implication being that our culture is implicitly inferior and would lose without the assistance of protection. I’m not comfortable with that implication.
I think there is a case for closed borders if a nation wants to make a moral stand (regardless of efficiency). Let’s suppose that we decide that slave labour is immoral, but in some cases it might well be quite economically efficient. We close borders to slaving nations out of a rejection of slavery.
Personally, I happen to believe that slavery is both immoral, AND inefficient, but it tends to be long-term inefficient and quite likely there are short-term cases where it will be efficient.
Tel
10 Feb 13 at 7:19 pm
Our culture is inferior. Political correctness has weakened us. Have a look at the world, two things are obvious:
Wherever Islam comes in contact with another culture there is conflict.
The more Muslims in a society the more trouble there is for the non-Muslims.
And Tel, you may think that slavery is immoral, but Muslims don’t.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 7:30 pm
Indeed Piett, well said.
Fix their own culture, leave my culture alone….we agree.
Alfonso
10 Feb 13 at 7:46 pm
I’ll open the borders for economic refugees if they waive their right to welfare. The country needs people who will work, not bludge like they won the lottery – which is what we’re actually getting.
Craig Mc
10 Feb 13 at 7:46 pm
As a businessman, may I point out that adoption of the new – including people – is not without a cost… and that the cost often precedes the benefit. It is quite easy to go broke if the short-term costs render your business unviable before the long-term benefits make you more profitable.
Another way of putting it is that in WW2 the Allies proved superior to the Axis, but the cost of proving it was incredibly high.
Yet another point is that when it comes to immigration, we do not have a free market. Just as we have immigrants who would be highly valuable, we also have immigrants who are low-value or of negative value. Our social-welfare system distorts the market so that the “transaction” of permitting low-value immigrants to enter the country is not beneficial to both parties.
PeterW.
10 Feb 13 at 7:57 pm
Craig Mc,
Which welfare do they lose their right to? The pension, even if they’ve been a hard worker and taxpayer for 40 years? Medical treatment in public hospitals, if they have an accident or serious illness? Newstart? What if there is an economic downturn, and they can’t, temporarily, find work … then the only choice is crime or starvation.
There are all sorts of ways the welfare state could be economised and better targeted, and I really hope Abbott will do this. But what remains has to apply equally to all citizens.
Piett
10 Feb 13 at 8:05 pm
Asylum shoppers are not citizens.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 8:13 pm
We’ve had somewhat open borders since the 1970s and that hasn’t happened.
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:13 pm
This seems a bit absolutist, since border policy is about more than economics. Point out its economic benefits, sure, but that’s not the same as ‘supporting’ it.
The simple version is that higher labor mobility results in higher productivity, and open borders is the maximum setting for labor mobility. Therefore open borders is the maximum productivity setting – “turning the dial up to 10″ – in terms of moving people around. I think that we can all agree that this is true and that protectionist impulses (‘protect local jobs’, etc) are misguided.
But border control is about more than that issue alone.
dd
10 Feb 13 at 8:13 pm
Look, I buy the concept of open borders and how it’s a good thing overall in terms of economics.
One slight problemo though. One side of politics is actively out there buying their votes and newcomers have a bad habit of supporting the left.
Make government smaller first unable to be tampered with by leftwing trogs and you have me.
Jc
10 Feb 13 at 8:17 pm
No we haven’t.
… Yet. But it will if we don’t stop the boats soon.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 8:19 pm
Totally fucking retarded.
HTH.
Abu Chowdah
10 Feb 13 at 8:21 pm
Come on. Tell us how many people need to come here as boat people instead of through the front door to bring on the caliphate”.
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:23 pm
JC says
”
Look, I buy the concept of open borders and how it’s a good thing overall in terms of economics.”
For everything except human beings JC?
ie you dont mind open borders for capital going where it wants to but you object to labour having the freedom to go where it wants to.
This BS about open borders really gives me the pips when the people who want it are being entirely selective and last time I looked at the price of something it was made up of “labour, capital and profit”
So far these open market junkies only want to free up capital and profit and screw the albour component. You talk a load of biased crap with the open markets BS JC. We dont need open markets or open the borders as well.
Personally I want to see some “global” racketeering price fixing bastards kicked out and their markets closed not opened.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:26 pm
A country is a lot like a pub. It only takes one or two dickheads to ruin the joint forever.
Infidel Tiger
10 Feb 13 at 8:26 pm
I know two of those dickeads IT. Richo who placed Obeid in the job and Obeid.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:28 pm
Infidel Tiger, you say there are pubs in your town without even one or two dickheads?
I don’t believe you.
Tel
10 Feb 13 at 8:31 pm
France now has 6 million 3rd world primitives many of whom significantly hate its Western domestic culture….and it started with a few Algerians….ask the French, ask the Danes, ask the Dutch, ask the Swedes…..there’s no doubt if they could all go back and decide on the immigration of failed incompatible cultures by referendum it would not have happened….not in a million years.
Good idea, referendum now Julia, what are you afraid of?
Oh, the result.
Bwaaa…..
Alfonso
10 Feb 13 at 8:33 pm
No Alice, communist economics is bunk.
The whole point of the objection to this article is that immigration is not viewed by everyone in economic terms.
Denying the economic benefits of immigration is just plain dumb. If the shoe fits…
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:33 pm
I mean fancy that – Richo who makes a fortune from the insurance payout on offset alpine…now we hear Packer owned it and sold it shortly before the fire and one of Obeid’s sons was on management at offset Alpine at the time of the fire.
These peopleare laughing at the rest of us – the people of the state of NSW and how many TV interviews has Richo given since as some sort of elder of the state Labor tribe
Puke. Double Puke. The hide of Jesse (the elephant at Taronga Park Zoo in the 1930s).
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:33 pm
John Howard increased immigration every year during his Premiership, despite his personal views.
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:35 pm
I’m usually one of them.
Go to a nice pub and see how it changes if even one bikie turns up. We can be welcoming and accomdating, but we must also be discerning.
Infidel Tiger
10 Feb 13 at 8:35 pm
I said NUFFINK about “communist economics” Dot and neither should have you.
If you want open markets you bloody well open ALL markets and that includes the Labor market (to go where it wants and work where it wants)
Or you are bloody hypocrites and you dont get to back down (weasel) out of this by trying to turn my point into a communist argument.
I aint no communist. I hate communism but I hate hypocrites more.
You either open all markets or you dont and shut up about “free market” BS.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:38 pm
Yes you did, but you were too ignorant to realise it.
Immigration creates jobs and raises real wages.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8446.00043/abstract
Do Migrants Rob Jobs? New Evidence from Australia
Gary Gang Tian, Jordan Shan
Australian Economic History Review
Volume 39, Issue 2, pages 133–142, July 1999
This study contributes to the recent debate on immigration and unemployment in Australia by investigating the causal linkage between immigration and unemployment. The question of whether ‘immigrants rob jobs’ is examined by identifying the sources of unemployment through causal linkages between unemployment and other key variables such as immigration. The research finds no Granger causality between immigration and unemployment, but does run from industrial structural change to the high unemployment rate in Australia. This research also finds that both GDP growth and immigration inflow reinforce each other in the course of economic development in Australia.
But of course Alice, you deadshit, you miss the point. The conservatives object to more than the economics, which they do NOT argue with.
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:43 pm
Dot I dont know what you are saying anyway
you dont mind immigration or what?
I am saying either open all markets including labour to go where it wants etc and then if it stuffs up you can rethink the mistakes later…but its no bloody good only going halfway and opening markets for capital and profits because all three (labour, capital and profits) make up a price and if the end game is the cheapest price you have left part of it out.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:44 pm
I repeat for your deaf ears Dot
” I said NUFFINK about “communist economics” Dot and neither should have you.
Yes you did, but you were too ignorant to realise it.”
So I apparently think like a communist even though I hate communism as you see it?
Try again Dot boy and dont put evil thoughts in my mind.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:46 pm
So you think we need central planning.
Idiot.
Read what Sinclair, Alfonso and Jupes have said.
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:46 pm
Thankyou Dot
“The research finds no Granger causality between immigration and unemployment, but does run from industrial structural change to the high unemployment rate in Australia. This research also finds that both GDP growth and immigration inflow reinforce each other in the course of economic development in Australia.”
I know this. Its in our history – so why the walls Huh? Why the endless boat people scaredy catism the news plays on? No just here.. if you want free markets build ports for the boat people to arrive safely and the US can remove its Mexico border checks and everywhere else can do the same.
You either commit to free markets in full or you dont.
Ask the other people that live here.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:49 pm
Indeed Howard did Null, and he’s a dickhead for every failed medieval socio religious “rhino to Alaska” move he made.
Referendum now, it’s not too late…I mean, what do the comrade social engineers have to fear except fear itself or a total demolishing via the Australian electorate.
Bwaaa……
Alfonso
10 Feb 13 at 8:50 pm
Dot says on my comment
” I am saying either open all markets including labour to go where it wants etc and then if it stuffs up you can rethink the mistakes later
So you think we need central planning.”
So I think we do need some central planning. So did Adam Smith.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:51 pm
No Alice, they can ask for MY permission to tax me more.
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:51 pm
Howard won four straight elections doing so.
.
10 Feb 13 at 8:53 pm
So its about your tax with you Dot?
Thats not a great place to start. It makes you look selfish and not a believer of the roads you drive on, the bridge you cross to get into town, the cops you use, the defence industry that protects you,
what else do you use Dot that was collectively paid for but that you dont want to pay for now?
We dont need to go that far and we dont need to lurch to the left also.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:54 pm
Yeah, well that’s the thing about bikies, if they only turned up in ones they would be no problem… but they never do turn up in ones.
Tel
10 Feb 13 at 8:55 pm
Thre are no fucking comrades Dot. Serioulsy this argument needs to die finally and irrevocably. What we need is the scum out of government, some really heavy punishments for the scum that purports to lead us but instead rips us off and does nothing.
That is the best place to start. Clean up the wheels of government and jail a few of the pricks (and hogtie the rest) by an effective law “when in government, thou shalt not etc”
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 8:57 pm
Indeed he did, while the electorate had no choice , it was LibLab LabLib…. a 35% vote one off vote for Hanson’s One Nation incompetents would have fixed 3rd world immigration permanently…..
Referendum now.
Alfonso
10 Feb 13 at 8:57 pm
Look around. You can be born and lived here all your life, be a hard worker and taxpayer for 40 years and not have the right to a pension.
Craig Mc
10 Feb 13 at 8:59 pm
Fuck me…being selfish about money that is taken off me by force. Perish the thought! What a foolish idea to oppose waste, graft and inefficiency! No fellas, here’s my tax refund – you guys can take it! You can spend it on Craig Thomson’s legal bill if you want.
The roads are shit, the bridge was long overdue, the cops were slow and the Army is underresourced, whilst taxes are usurious.
I paid for them Alice. I’ve paid enough. So has everyone else.
Have you added anything to this discussion about immigration other than you want to go back to protectionism and you think laissez faire brings down wages Alice?
No. Moron.
.
10 Feb 13 at 9:01 pm
How many times does it need to be said…. while ever we provide incentives for migrants to come here – like welfare, free education and health care – that are NOT directly connected to their productivity, we do not have a free market.
Clumsy as it may be, restricted migration at least allows us to select higher-value immigrants. Open borders permit immigrants to select their country while not permitting the citizens of that country to select immigrants. That isn’t a free market.
PeterW.
10 Feb 13 at 9:01 pm
…and raised the tax to GDP ratio to 50% and made us a socialist banana republic.
For they were the other planks of One Nation policy.
I’m glad we know where your sympathies lie.
.
10 Feb 13 at 9:02 pm
I think you’re afraid of reality, Alfonso.
.
10 Feb 13 at 9:04 pm
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 9:07 pm
Muslims are like outlaw motorcycle groups?
.
10 Feb 13 at 9:10 pm
I’m perfectly happy to pay for the things I use:
[1] at market rates;
[2] in a competitive market where I have choices who to buy from;
and [3] where I have the ability to not pay for what I don’t use.
Case in point, the National Broadband Network.
Well right now I’m using iiNet ADSL-2 and buying a “business” service for $100 a month, but recently there was a line fault, which means someone arbitrarily got a pair of side cutters and just cut the copper connection to my house. I have never had a problem with the speed of the service, I never had drop outs with the copper, nor bad performance. The only problem I ever had was when someone cut the line.
Now, it took iiNet ONE WEEK to get someone around to have a look at it. The guy who turned up was not actually an iiNet employee, he was a contractor, and he did about 15 minutes work by clipping a meter to the wire and saying, “Yup, that’s a fault”.
Next it took Telstra ONE MORE WEEK to get someone to turn up, and this guy worked for about one hour rummaging in the pits up and down the street to find the place where the wire was cut so he could hook it up again. That’s two weeks continuous downtime with no phones, and no Internet.
So the ALP bozos tell me that I’m better off with fiber because it is faster, as they replace the Telstra monopoly with a new monopoly and yet I did not ask for anything faster, what I ask for is something more reliable. Nowhere on the NBN website is there any penalty money offered for downtime or lack of response to faults.
No doubt I’ll be forced to use the NBN at some stage and people will tell me I should be feel honoured to pay for this crap because I submit to using it, when by law no alternative is allowed to exist!
It doesn’t serve my requirements, it isn’t what I asked for, it will surely cost more than what we have right now, and I want penalties for downtime.
Tel
10 Feb 13 at 9:15 pm
That’s a totally naive way of looking at it.
Culture is the trump card. If you let enough people in with a different culture, they will change the society they immigrate to.
Name one country that has benefitted with an increase of over 5% to their population from Islamic immigration.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 9:15 pm
You haven’t been reading the papers lately have you?
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 9:17 pm
Jupes, you could say the same about any ethnic group or religious group you happen to dislike.
In my observation, most Muslims don’t cause trouble. Some do, that’s true, and those individuals should be dealt with, as individuals.
The point is that in any society there are a minority of people doing disreputable and anti-social things and quite a lot of them get away with it. That’s normal, and the problem starts when the number of trouble makers grows beyond the ability of the society to deal with them.
Of course we will argue about exactly what is “anti-social”, there are people who believe that using electricity is “anti-social” and there are people who dispute that, but we have a political process to polish out those details.
Tel
10 Feb 13 at 9:23 pm
All Muslims are like bikie gang members?
That’s off the reservation.
.
10 Feb 13 at 9:24 pm
Well we are already reaping the ‘benefits’ of Islamic immigration. We see it almost daily in Sydney. There is a simple formula: the more Muslims, the more trouble for society. Once they are around 15 – 20% of the population, I reckon there will be Islamic areas in Australia which will be no go zones for Kaffurs. From that point, it is only a matter of time before we will have to fight for our existence.
Far better to close the borders now, than fight them in Australia later on.
But I make no distinction between those that come by boat and those that come through the front door.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 9:32 pm
You didnt pay for them Dot (the bridges, the roads etc)
Your parents and grandparents paid for them and now we get grafters selling them off for a peppercorn and collecting big fat bribes.
OR you get state and ffederal governments not EVEN maintaining them with our taxes but shifting maintenance of said roads back to local councils to hit us up for rates whilst at the same time keeping taxes up round our necks (in other words a double payment to keep some of these scum – thommo, Obeid and the like – in the manner to shich they have become accustomed). The problem is not taxes per say Dot, its who is running our taxes and who they are a rewarding.
It wasnt always this way. We once built much more with far less but the scum we have in now have no controls on them. Successively dismantled the controls on what they cant and cant do, what they do and do not deserve, who they can and cant mix with.
We can go your way Dot. I am pissed off myself at the overcharging of the taxpayer but dont say you paid for it all. You didnt.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 9:33 pm
Really? Then I want my fucking money back.
.
10 Feb 13 at 9:35 pm
Maybe not. But the more there are, the more trouble there is. Every terrorist in jail in Australia is a Muslim. Do you think if we continue to allow Muslims to immigrate that there won’t be more?
I agree.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 9:36 pm
No.
jupes
10 Feb 13 at 9:37 pm
I want to see some protectionism yes Dot and no I dont think laissez faire is the answer. I am not ashamed to say this.
I do want to see stiffer penalties (much stiffer) on the whole of politics and government and I want to see less perks, less junkets, less super, less wages, less expenditure on the public purse, less junkets from private firms to politicians, less partying between these two sectors (public and private).
The party is just about over. They have pissed everyone off.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 9:38 pm
“Hey, we fucked up our country, this sucks”
“No, it’s fine, there’s people over there who have built a good country, and they’ve opened the border”
“Ah, cool, lets go there!”
Harold
10 Feb 13 at 9:42 pm
Agree Harold – yes we are free and flexible and adapaptable and ready to uproot and move to another country in search of work in the interests of free open markets and the search for work
(not)
Only when we fuck it up badly enough here will that happen.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 9:49 pm
I support immigration. But you have to be able to get people acclimated and in possession of a basic grasp of the state of rule of law and so on, as fast as you bring them in.
Open borders is ideologically nice, but historically large cultural and demographic shifts have implications beyond dollars and cents. Genocide is one such.
wreckage
10 Feb 13 at 9:53 pm
Alice, Harold was making a point basically on your side of the argument.
wreckage
10 Feb 13 at 9:54 pm
Mankiw says –
THIS competition from abroad may reduce the salaries of American-born economists like me, but it has improved the university, much to our students’ benefit. For one thing, such competition keeps down the university’s labor costs. Many parents are shocked at how high college tuition is, but it could be worse.
Mankiw has tenure and writes textbooks – his salary will be unaffected. Like most bullshit foisted upon us by the elite – competition as per Mankiw is “good for thee but not for me”.
As far as the discussion regarding the merits or not of Muslim immigration – do any of the pro-camp live in SW Sydney or the equivalent in Melbourne ? If not then I am struggling to see how you get to sit at the grown ups table on this issue.
Podsnap
10 Feb 13 at 9:58 pm
I had to read it twice wreckage, but I do believe she understood that. We haven’t fucked up our country so don’t desire to uproot.
Harold
10 Feb 13 at 9:59 pm
Wreckage
Do you mind?
I am not silly (only sometimes). I agreed with what Harold said in entirety and my comment was in support of his also.
But thanks anyway Wreckage. I know you meant well in case I was confused. This time I wasnt but other times I have been.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:01 pm
You got it Harold!
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:02 pm
Aliice, this is where you sound like a communist. Prices are determined by subjective valuations of final goods not the cost of inputs.
For the record, I think we need to open the labour market. The initial increase in labour supply will increase investment and will therefore eventually lead to higher wages. I see no issues with restricting access to newstart for the first 12 months and there has to be some consideration of cultural compatibility. I think Howard’s migration test was a gimmick, but we need some way of screening out fascist arseholes who want to come over here and change our country into a 7th century theocracy.
Skuter
10 Feb 13 at 10:02 pm
Skuter.
Now I dont care why you think I sound like a communist for saying a price is made up of labour, capital and profits because
ITS exactly what its made up of (couldnt be any plainer). Add the costs (capital and labour) of making a widget up and then add the profit and that = price.
while you are working out why this is capitalist and not communist I will go and get my much needed beauty sleep.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:07 pm
Btw before I do
“subjective valuations” on price only make more or less profit Skuter bits its still the same labour, capital and profit (more or less) depending on subjective valuations….
this aint the cost of inputs – profit encompasses subjective valuations ALREADY.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:09 pm
IF I was a communist Skuter I mau have said “pre determined mark up” or no mark up at all.
I said “profit” and you must know profit drives the capitalst system, not the communist system.
Dont confuse profit with mark up…and while you are arguing this semantic stuff there are armies of capitalist accountants adding up the input costs and profits of every capitalist firm in town.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:16 pm
Aliice, when I purchase anything, I don’t give a shit about the cost of things that go into making it. Nor do I care about any particular rate of profit. All I care about is whether the good or service is more valuable to me than the cash I would exchange for it. A merchant can try to charge anything they like on an item or service. If I don’t value it that much, it doesn’t get sold. If others agree with me, then the merchant will put the price down and possibly cease production.
At best, your definition of ‘price’ is an ex post tautology. Acquiring the labour and capital resources is done well before the sale of the good or service. The profit or loss component is determined by the subjective valuations of consumers.
Skuter
10 Feb 13 at 10:30 pm
Skuter
Yor are the consumer with your “dont give a shit”
I can assure you the prouducer and his beancounters do give a shit and they will be analysiing and costing every aspect of every thought that goes through your uncaring mind and every breath you take on the way to the store to buy ther product.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:34 pm
along with the cost of inputs Skuter…from the salesman to the cleaner.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:35 pm
You know soemthing Skuter – this is precisely why a lot of people are thinking economists are growing increasingly disconnected with the real world.
So you think the cost of inputs dont matter and dont form part of the price? Unless the product is a dud, didnt sell and is being fireslaed at below cost you are completely wrong and even then it matters.
If the cost of inputs isnt so important why are there so many more jobs for beancounters than economists?
Maybe it is because of what the producer thinks is important to cost that beancounters actually count?. They dont re-engineer what information the producer thinks he wants or tell the guy what really makes up his prices is completely exogenous.
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:41 pm
Skuter said
“he profit or loss component is determined by the subjective valuations of consumers.
Aliice said way back up there
“profit encompasses subjective valuations ALREADY”.
and may be more or less???”
I think we are talking at cross purposes Skuter
Aliice
10 Feb 13 at 10:44 pm
BS to the economic argument. Within our own borders all we’re doing is scratching each others backs. Another immigrant is another back scratcher plus one more back to scratch. Once economies of scale are realised there’s no additional benefit to having more people.
Trade complicates it.
Would it be a good idea for Swiss to open their borders? The oil rich Arab states?
Our mining profits don’t increase because we increase our population, but they’ll be split among more people.
“good for the economy” itself is a vague statement. “The economy” would like us all to for free. China has a great economy largely because it’s full of desperate people who will work for peanuts.
Harold
10 Feb 13 at 10:47 pm
Edit: “The economy” would like us all to WORK for free
Harold
10 Feb 13 at 10:47 pm
T
CameronH
10 Feb 13 at 10:51 pm
The defense of our culture would not be a problem if we were actually allowed to defend it. The current environment with political correctness make this close to impossible. The recent example with the problems that Mr Wilders is having coming here to talk about Islam and its effect on our freedoms is a good example. Islamists are able to come here and say what they like and openly call for the overthrow of our political system and the implementation of an Islamic theocracy while any push back is branded as evil and racists means that we are essentially disarmed in this battle.
CameronH
10 Feb 13 at 11:00 pm
Does anyone even know where Wilders is speaking ? Last time I checked the whole thing had to be kept undercover because of fear of those free speech advocates of the left, and the peacable members of the religion of peace.
Podsnap
10 Feb 13 at 11:31 pm
You need a population the size of the USA, or China, or maybe just the EU to reach economies of scale. And the rest of your argument assumes a zero-sum game, which is just wrong, sorry.
wreckage
10 Feb 13 at 11:49 pm
Actually it has a relatively great economy because it’s really only now undergoing the Industrial Revolution. The people who work for very little by our standards are getting paid infinitely more than the immediate alternative – subsistence agriculture, probably the most brutal lifestyle humanity has ever suffered through. Wages in China have been going up, and fast, for the entirety of its “economic miracle”.
The free market doesn’t want you to work for free unless your skillset is so shit that your productive or additive capacity is zero. It doesn’t “want you to work for free” any more or less than it wants to supply you with stuff for free.
wreckage
10 Feb 13 at 11:58 pm
Generalist blanket statement wreckage.
When does the widget maker refuse to offer further discounts per extra unit? How long is a piece of string…
There’s different economies of scale. Transport for instance can be cheaper if more use it. You can achieve that by squeezing the same population together more.
Talk specifics and we’ll have an argument.
And please, will the Arabs get richer by opening their borders to new citizens? A simple Yes or No will suffice.
Harold
11 Feb 13 at 12:04 am
Anti-discrimnation legislation just transferred the responsibility for discrimination away from the people to the government, who promptly applied it against the existing culture.
Driftforge
11 Feb 13 at 12:04 am
All the great things in Araby have been built and designed by foreigners, so that is a resounding yes.
Infidel tiger
11 Feb 13 at 12:08 am
Wreckage the economy doesn’t give a shit if you’re tired, unhappy, miserable or overworked. It wants to squeeze whatever useful productivity out of your for the least it can get it.
Of course a factory owner would prefer to pay their workers nothing, hell they’d prefer they turned up and paid the factory owner to work there. (and if you peruse Gumtree you’ll find some such offers!)
Harold
11 Feb 13 at 12:09 am
Infidel tiger my question pertains to new citizens. At the moment they bring in guest workers who they choof off after they’ve served their usefulness. For some reason they prefer that.
A new citizen will hang around and partake in the national pie, and breed new Arab born citizens.
Harold
11 Feb 13 at 12:13 am
Ticket purchasers only will be notified two days in advance to minimise disruptions from the Religion of Peace. It’s the same deal as Robert Spencer’s visit last year, he’s on the top of AQ’s “most wanted” list so security has to be tight.
old bloke
11 Feb 13 at 12:49 am
Economics should not be the only issue to consider when contemplating the benefits or otherwise of open borders. Any society needs social cohesion which won’t be achieved through importing people hostile to the host society.
WRT Islam, a Moslem’s first obligation is to the Ummah, the international brotherhood of believers. Loyalty to a secular state is an anathema in Islamic ideology.
We were protected from this danger for many years. I fear that the lessons which earlier politicians learnt at Broken Hill have been forgotten, and I fear that many more “Broken Hills” are in our future.
old bloke
11 Feb 13 at 1:05 am
I would have to know the context first of the above argument before commenting too much. It is extremely vague and doesn’t mention if it is about citizenship or workers only. If it is workers only then even elected officials should be subject to what they are willing to put cab drivers through. An open border with workers which does not exist anywhere in the world would make me much richer so go for it. Pity about the bottom 60 or 70% of the population.
kelly liddle
11 Feb 13 at 1:23 am
Time to raise the Double Standard?
Why stop at economics academics?
Much of the power behind the open borders policies of the left comes from academcis across the spectrum, yet strangely they are not big fans of open borders for their profession.
And I mean OPEN borders, like anyone who arrives via boat or plane (as those illegals arriving by plane are the same problem according to that lot) should automatically have a right to compete for jobs with university academics.
Token
11 Feb 13 at 8:22 am
To paraphrase Uncle Milt: You can have open borders, or you can have a welfare state. You cannot have both.
If you have a no-questions-asked free-shit-for-life welfare state, you will end up with people migrating onto your dole queue, not into your labor market.
How many people who have never paid into your “free” health system, never paid into your “free” pension system, never paid into your “free” childcare system, never paid into your “free” school system, never paid into your “free” disability and NDIS systems, never paid into your “free” social housing system, never paid a single cent and never will pay a single cent into the system which is going to totally support them and their families for life … can a country support?
If people know that they can come to Australia, never work a day in their lives, and be supported by the stupid taxpaying working mugs to a standard of living they would never have been able to reach in their own countries, explain to me how you won’t eventually reach a “tipping point” where the tax-eaters outnumber the tax-payers by a factor too great to support.
Generous taxpayer-supported welfare state + open borders = unsustainable.
sdog
11 Feb 13 at 8:34 am
Don’t know why, but my last comment (8:43am) is stuck in moderation.
No links, and the only swear-word I used was “s–h–i–t” … once. Hey?
sdog
11 Feb 13 at 8:37 am
8:34, not 8:43. Oy.
sdog
11 Feb 13 at 8:38 am
Ha ha ha…
Harold, I worked in Saudi Arabia in the early 90s. Whilst there, I asked as a matter of curiosity about citizenship.
I think they are still laughing…
Winston SMITH
11 Feb 13 at 11:45 am