Qualified people is what I want. It is the unqualified that cause unrest and steal jobs.
I did not say anything about ethnicity, you are putting words in my mouth. I said nationality, education, income.. all perfectly valid criteria that can be used to select immigrants. Remember, immigration is a privilege, not a right. You ultimately do not have to allow anyone to immigrate. So whether you want to consider points system a prejudice or not, it is the best system and entirely ethical.
No, you were pretty clear in your condemnations of Gypsy culture. Also, if you're taking nationality into account, then by the magic of how nations are formed, you are also counting ethnicity.
It is the opposite in eastern Europe, we certainly have too much unqualified people and too little qualified ones. Anyway, I do not believe there will be strong need for unqualified labor in the future, not here and not in Japan. Modern economies simply do not need many such people, and this trend will only continue in the future. By importing them you are more likely to increase poverty and steal jobs than truly help the economy.
There is one more important point to make here. Most taxes are usually paid by high paying workers, especially in progressive tax systems, with low paying workers barely breaking even when it comes to funding the state. So even if you import lots of low paying workers, they wont help much to fund pensions, if at all.
You really,
really need to stop assuming things and start reading about how modern economies work. The money people in low-income situations get is very quickly recirculated through the economy, unlike that paid to the highest earners, which tends to stay in the pockets of those high earners.
Secondly, untrained people
are available for training. They can be used, and are used, to cover situations where a lot of labor is needed quickly. Trained people? Not so much. Someone with a full job qualification or degree is orders of magnitude less flexible than someone who just got out of school, and that sort of flexibility is absolutely necessary.
It is as I said, one working person may have to support one non-working, but not several ones. This is not an ideal situation, but sustainable IMHO.
Citation needed. For this to work, every working member of society (and, you will note, this assumes that everyone
capable of working is
actually working) needs to generate enough revenue for society that another, nonworking person can live off of it. Since not a single economy on this planet manages to employ everyone (for that matter, full employment
is actually a bad thing), and since not every job will be equally highly paid, we know that people above a certain income threshold will have to be so highly taxed as to make getting into highly paid jobs no longer worthwhile.
Now, here's some homework for you to do. Research the positive effects illegal labor has had on the economy of the southern US.
I do believe individual productivity will rise significantly until 2060, because of investments in science and technology and general growth of the economy and efficiency. Past trends are clearly like this and there is no reason to believe it will not continue to hold.
Are you willing to bet your retirement on that assumption?
You assume there's effectively infinite growth potential, you assume that economic growth will continue to happen, you assume that efficiency can rise so that the unbalanced age pyramid doesn't matter,
and you call ME naive?Another thing to take into account is that this is not all about the economy. If you allow immigration of migrants that have trouble assimilating, then you are also importing crime, ethnic conflicts and terrorism. And this is a very serious issue because once you admit such people inside the country and they wont integrate well, such problems can go on for many generations or centuries. You could be negatively affecting even you childrens children. These reasons alone are sufficient to justify being very careful about who to let in.
It is, ultimately,
only about the economy. People stuck in economic dead ends tend to be restless. People living in safety, with a roof over their heads and food in their bellies and their kids on the way to a better life will rarely be a problem. People who want those things, but can't get them because some racist ****tard decided that Syrians cannot be good citizens
will become a problem.
