Which part is incorrect?
I mean that, you're either saying he wasn't democratically elected, or that this move doesn't help domestic labor. The first is objectively false, and the second is covered in the most basic college economics courses.
Which part is incorrect?
I mean that, you're either saying he wasn't democratically elected, or that this move doesn't help domestic labor. The first is objectively false, and the second is covered in the most basic college economics courses.
>the second is covered in the most basic college economics courses.
You realize the courses don't stop at basic, right?
It is well-established that immigration (legal and otherwise) is good for the economy overall. Skilled immigrants are good for US businesses.
https://kentclarkcenter.org/surveys/permanent-residency-rule...
Immigrants start businesses at twice the rate of native-born Americans.
https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/116727/documents/... (page 1, though the citation has gone down the memory hole)
Some immigrants are complementary to native-born American workers rather than being in competition.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/page-one-economics/2...
Immigrants spend money and grow the market for goods produced by native-born Americans.
All these things are good for domestic labor. There is no reason to believe immigration is bad for American workers. Not everything is zero-sum, and that's basic economics.
This is all true and it's referring to immigration generally. This is a specific type of immigration so let's talk about that specific type and not every other type.
This is immigration to staff augmentation body shops that are doing $150k/yr programming jobs with the company taking 25% off the top. It's not "immigrants starting businesses," it's not "the economy overall" it's targeting immigration suppressing the wages of a specific sector.
Maybe. I haven't seen that proven. I can easily imagine that making the US technology sector function more efficiently leads to higher employment. The fact that the US is home to all of the big tech companies is a boon to American employees, and this form of immigration is a boon to the big tech companies.
[flagged]
If you zoom out it's closer to, "this is an outrage. My billionaires were supposed to buy that election!"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/10/30/kamala-har...
Yes and this is why the US is a oligarchy not an autocracy (yet)
Corporate political donations and opinions should be outlawed
What is a "corporate political opinion?"
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citi...
> Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the narrow majority that limits on independent spending from corporations and other outside groups equate to limiting their speech and thus violate the First Amendment.
So basically corporate donation is corporate opinion is protected under the First Amendment
Citizens United was an awful, anti-democratic decision, regardless of which side "your" billionaires are on.