What are the PURELY economics effects of immigrants entering the country?

Pretty sure the economist has an article about the economic effects of Mexican immigrants in the US. Turns out they're actually a net benefit to the economy.

Its a clear net positive for the country. Higher population growth. Higher gdp growth. Increase in demand for all consumer goods. Though primarily inferior goods and housing. Broadens base for welfare and social security. Allows sales tax to become a greater percentage of revenue.

It does have some negative effects on the the unskilled workers in our country and those who must share living spaces in the slums where they like to live; However , using this or the argument that they bring crime is paramount to demanding that we subsidize our own criminal under-class from foreign competition.

In uk 70% of immigrants receive benefits

>The pie is sliced a larger number of times in every case
No, since immigrants with jobs also help producing a bigger pie.

Is that an argument?

Does that connect to anything I said?

Or does it just hut your tribalist lizard brain?

>Higher gdp growth

not GDP/citizen though hahaha

>help producing a bigger pie

Lel not really, no. All they do is disrupt the industries, undercut wages, and make their own countries even poorer.

Regarding illegal immigration in the US:

Lower wages of low-skilled workers
Lower prices of goods
Higher health care costs
Overall increased economic output

I'll just paste what I wrote (which also counts the non-economic effects, but i can't be assed to redact it) in another thread a few days ago:

Assuming the benefit of the few pros is enough to break even on the huge expense of immigrating them in Europe like for food, shelter, welfare, etc. (which is completely absurd considering how they tend to work very little -almost nothing for the women- and always take advantage of every opportunity to leech and be proud of it), you have to consider the cost (for the economy and society) of the very high crime rate, the degradation that they bring, and the significant portion of their paycheck that goes to their country (taking money out of the economy), etc.

Also the hidden consequences like the value of properties in the areas where they go dropping because nobody wants to live with an unwashed mass of refugees as neighbors, or the number of people who move out of the country, or the massive bad publicity that this has brought (which can convince foreign companies to not invest in the affected countires), or the fact that they will never integrate, therefore creating division inside the country (between the locals, the immigrants, their "enablers", etc.) that eventually makes the country weaker as a whole (with all the consequences).

Plus the non-economic benefits such as a less safe country, the diffusion of Islam (take it from an Arab, you don't want a single muslim in your country. Even the good ones, which I'm sure are numerous, are still a huge damage to society for a many reasons) and the consequent rise in the probability of terrorist attacks, the weakening of the population (and its race in case of mixed-race children), since these people are often borderline retarded (seriously, check the average IQ and illiteracy rates of their countries) and very inbred, making the number of stupid people significantly higher (and increading healthcare costs because of the health issues stemming from their inbred genes).
(1/3)

Also middle easterns and africans tend to be a lot more impulsive and aggressive than other races (with the exception of maybe latin americans, they're the most aggressive/animalistic people in the world) and are significantly uglier (I know it's not really important, but if a herder had a herd of top quality white horses he would be crazy to mix them with a huge number of inbred horses of the worst breeds in the world. Imagine if paintings and frescoes died of old age and were capable of reproducing like living beings. Would you put a child's drawing in the Sistine Chapel, allowing Michelangelo's masterpieces to make painting-kids with ugly painting, forever ruining the beauty -and everything else, really- of the group, ruining the quality of the paintings themselves, generation by generation?).

And their culture, even ignoring their religion, is pure cancer under every point of view, as it's directly influenced by Islam and by the life that Islam makes them live (and for Aficans, even if they're not muslims, imagine what kind of people they are by analyzing the place they come from). An example of this are their pedophile tendencies, that of course manifest themselves on arab kids, but also on European kids, when they kidnap-rape them or "groom" them by turning them into addicts and giving them drugs in exchange for sex.
(2/3)

Plus, remember that those millions of "refugees" shouldn't be seen as a small number when compared to the total population of the country, since they're not distributed homogeneously and most of the country is barely affected by them, as they all go to the important cities and mostly ignore the other areas.
This makes them hugely damaging to the areas where they are concentrated, which are obviously the richest and most important centers, that now will be ruined because a proportionally huge mass of animals will live in them.

This is just from the top of my mind. I'm sure there are many other negative sides to this utter madness, but even if there weren't, would all this be compensated by some economic benefit? Even if said benefit was huge, would it be worth it to destroy your country for money?

That's like selling a kidney for 50 million dollars while knowing that you'll certainly end up needing to do two dialysis sessions every day for the rest of your days.
There's no point in ruining everything for money that aren't even enough to cover for the damage. It's absolute madness.

Anyway, sorry for going full /pol/.
(3/3)

>Higher population growth

If I'm a horse breeder with a stable full of purebloods that people pay good money to buy and make them run, then I should add a few cheap, shitty horses with my purebloods, so that in the end, I end up with more horses, right?

Or if I havea beautiful garden with lots of beautiful flowers, I should add some of pic related, so that in the end I end up having more flowers!

TL;DR:
Quality>quantity.

A smaller group of civilized people with useful skills and good genes is MUCH better than a larger group of uncivilized apes with no skills and a tendency to ruin everything they touch (it's not a coincidence that their countries are complete shitholes. Any percentace of your population that's taken up by them is proportional to how similar your country is to theirs).

Forgot I had to upload this picture (as I wrote "pic related") and uploaded another.

My bad.

Positive growth. No relation with wage decrease

how

- Increased supply of low skill and unskilled labor and related effects on the labor market.
- Increased consumption of the sorts of goods and services that low income workers purchase.

Whether these are good or bad depend entirely on your point of view.

>What are the PURELY economics effects of immigrants entering the country?

As a successful immigrant who came to the US legally and now making six figures...

You faggots really need to learn to separate Legal, educated, entrepreneurial immigrants vs. Illegal immigrants who come here to suck up welfare and american resources.

As an immigrant who went through the 7 year legal process for a green card, I love fellow hard workin legal immigrants.

I hate fucking illegal criminal border hoppers. These are the shit people in our countries too...

BS
Most migrants coming to Europe right now have a degree.

Quantity has a quality all its own. - Napoleon

> all degrees carry weight

First off
> good genes
/pol/ please go

Second
>What are the PURELY economics effects
Did you even read the thread? Or just start shit posting full speed?

Also your examples are terrible.

Population growth is linked to tech innovation and not some kind of dystopian decline.

j-bradford-delong.net/teaching_Folder/Econ_202c/readberk/1-Demography/Kremer_Million.pdf

Why are you all going full /pol/. This is a thread about economics not conspiracy theories about arabs being genetically inferior.

Atleast this guy is on topic.

More demand for jobs meams lower pay.

Good for exports, but with diminishing returns. Lower average wages means more poverty and crime.

This thread is only a vehicle to go full /pol/. That's the WHOLE POINT of this thread. Any other discussion that happens is an accidental side effect.

Pic related.

You seem to have missed the literal first paragraph. The one that says:
>I'll just paste what I wrote (which also counts the non-economic effects, but i can't be assed to redact it) in another thread a few days ago

>>good genes /pol/ please go
Do you really believe evolution had an effect on races on their entire bodies but their brain?
Are you a creationist?
There's plenty of credible sources that can prove that different races tend to have different IQs, different aggressiveness levels, etc. because they all evolved for what they need for survival.
A caucasian or asian person might be good at logic because caucasians and asians needed it to use it for survival in the areas where they evolved.
A black person evolved where there wasn't need for much logic to survive, so they're weaker in that field, while being better in other fields where whites and asians are inferior, such as physical things, where blacks completely dominate, and things like hunting and surviving in their area (similar to how sherpas are genetically advantaged to survive in their environment and are often essential to foreigners who want to climb the Himalayas).

This is all scientifically proven, but obviously it's taboo to talk about it, because facts are racist apparently.

>conspiracy theories about arabs being genetically inferior
It's not a teory. It's fact.
On top of what I said above, Islam promotes cousin marriages, and if you went to school, you would know what that does to your children's genes. Imagine a population that has a history of 1400 years of inbreeding.
cairnsnews.org/2015/09/30/muslims-suffer-insanity-low-iq-recessive-disorders-from-1400-years-inbreeding/
theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/robert-spencer
reproductive-health-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1742-4755-6-17

Also I'm an arab myself. This isn't hate or racism, but the pure truth. Ignoring it will only ruin your countries.

Really depends on the immigrants and the laws of the countries they immigrate to.

Skilled immigrants entering to work jobs for which there are no citizens available for is an economic win all round.

Unskilled immigrants entering to exploit the welfare system is an economic loss.

>Also your examples are terrible.
Care to argument please?

>Population growth is linked to tech innovation and not some kind of dystopian decline.
Are you sure it's like this in every case?
Even when the population grows because of an influx of shitty people who are insanely more criminal, lazier, uncivilized, don't work (and if they do, it's in their enclaves where they only sell products and services to their own people), get all the welfare they can (maybe you don't know this, but in their culture, taking advantage of people is a bragging right, and taking advantage of non-muslims is strongly encouraged), and send the excess money to their countries?

Or maybe you think different groups of people, with different genes, different cultures, different histories, etc. are all the same?
You don't think these people are going to behave differently between each other?

Even black americans are so different from whites (culturally and genetically, meaning they behave very differently and have different capabilities). Look at how much crime they commit (proportional to their small numbers), and how high their unemployment rate is (despite the huge number of blacks working for the government, where they tend to hire each other more than other races), and the amount of them that is on welfare (and therefore a long-term unproductive leech), amog the other things.
I'll google a few of them for you:
fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-43 (the 2015 isn't online yet)
theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/12/black-white-unemployment-gap/421497/
statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

>j-bradford-delong.net/teaching_Folder/Econ_202c/readberk/1-Demography/Kremer_Million.pdf
Pic related.
I've already wasted too much time in this thread. Give me a summary.
If it doen't address the difference in population "quality" and only talks about its quantity, then don't even bother.

Great for anyone who is upper middle class or higher.

Bad for everyone else.

Generally bad for a country's government and infrastructure overall.

Build the wall.

This.
It's all about what immigrants come in your country.
As I wrote before, the more you fill your country with third-worlders, the more your country will be similar to those third world countries (look at fucking Sweden FFS).

Here in Italy there's a myth that immigrants are good for the economy and they raise the GDP and create wealth.
This comes from the data that shows that in Italy, the economic costs are slightly lower than the economic benefits (so the country ends up making a couple of billions of profit or something like that).
This obviously ignores the long-term and the non-economic effects (and their economic consequences I talked about in my first 3 posts, which are hidden), but also ignores the data about which types of immigrants we have.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Italy#Statistics
As you can see, there are TONS of eastern Europeans, and a lot of Chinese (which also tend to invest many billions in our economy wired.it/economia/business/2016/05/10/investimenti-cinesi-italia/), while African and Middle Eastern immigrants are relatively rarer.
And despite all this, the country barely even manages to turn a profit.
Statistics about Middle Easterns in Europe used to show how shitty they were as people and citizens, so they stopped releasing them kek.

Also, if we're talking about African and Middle Eastern immigrants, the mere fact that they're immigrants in western Europe shows that they're there precisely to take advantage of what they think will be given to them. They're there to leech, not to exchange their skills (which they rarely have, and when they have them they're not comparable to those of european-educated professionals) for money.

I got my AS in two semesters. In India one can literally pay for a degree. What sort of weight do you honestly feel degrees carry? Because it's a glorified high school as far as some of us are concerned.

Source.

Are you fucking retarded? 70% of them collecting government hand puts is in no way shape or form a net positive for the country. Any net positive is them being carried by people who aren't on benefits. Fucking kill yourself

I mean as long as they stay illegal and don't decide to have a honda civic full of babies then they buy goods rent houses -two bitch apartments- and work. Plus the government doesn't provide anything for illegals, so they keep money flowing and don't take up resources from the government. The shitty part is when they have a million babies and collect checks dummies.

Which country are you talking about?
I'm assuming it's the USA, in which case you're misinformed, because illegals do cost a lot to the government.

investors.com/politics/editorials/sorry-but-illegal-aliens-cost-the-u-s-plenty/
>Illegal immigrants in fact absorb far more in benefits than they contribute. The Heritage Foundation in 2013 found that illegals contribute an average of $10,000 in total taxes (federal and payroll as well as local taxes) but use almost $24,000 in welfare and services, creating a net $14,000 per capita gain per illegal worker.

fairus.org/publications/the-fiscal-burden-of-illegal-immigration-on-united-states-taxpayers

>Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.

>The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality

>Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.

>At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.

>Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.

Also pic related (but that's mostly non-economic).