PDA

View Full Version : International Cities


Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 05:09 PM
The government should open up large urban zones, city's, to all immigrants that have secured employment in advance.

This would produce considerable economics benefits, and impose minimal costs on a geographically-mobile populace.

Discuss.

Flapjack
August 3rd, 2016, 05:13 PM
The government should open up large urban zones, city's, to all immigrants that have secured employment in advance.

This would produce considerable economics benefits, and impose minimal costs on a geographically-mobile populace.

Discuss.
Immigrants or refugees?

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 05:17 PM
Immigrants or refugees?
Immigrants.

I have a separate plan for refugees (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3260430&postcount=27), which is described in this post and argued in detail across the next page or so. You're free to argue about that here if you disagree, since it is tangential.

Porpoise101
August 3rd, 2016, 05:26 PM
Ok I'll bite. If you did that, the historic character of the city would be diminished.

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 05:38 PM
Ok I'll bite. If you did that, the historic character of the city would be diminished.
I'm not sure how.

But nonetheless, more problematic is what this attitude in policymaking implies. Confident nations look to the future and seek to build a history that their ancestors can be proud of. It is a defeated nation that clings to the past in a vain attempt to recall its greatness. The opportunity cost of past greatness, is future greatness, after all.

Porpoise101
August 3rd, 2016, 05:51 PM
I'm not sure how.

But nonetheless, more problematic is what this attitude in policymaking implies. Confident nations look to the future and seek to build a history that their ancestors can be proud of. It is a defeated nation that clings to the past in a vain attempt to recall its greatness. The opportunity cost of past greatness, is future greatness, after all.
Ok sounds fair enough.

Here is another complaint that I am sure that one would receive for proposing this:
If you invite a bunch of immigrants, then won't they push out the poorer, pre-existing residents?

Flapjack
August 3rd, 2016, 05:51 PM
Immigrants.

I have a separate plan for refugees (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3260430&postcount=27), which is described in this post and argued in detail across the next page or so. You're free to argue about that here if you disagree, since it is tangential.
Okayy:)
The government should open up large urban zones, city's, to all immigrants that have secured employment in advance.

This would produce considerable economics benefits, and impose minimal costs on a geographically-mobile populace.

Discuss.
Well an immigrant is someone that comes to live permanently so I wouldn't worry about them being geographically-mobile.

How would they have secured employment when there are not enough jobs for the current population? What economic benefits? I could see that if a run down city is chosen it could boost the economy or if a city is to be built it could but other than that the only economic benefit I can see is a boost from cheaper labour which is illegal and I don't believe would really boost the economy.

Porpoise101
August 3rd, 2016, 05:57 PM
Well an immigrant is someone that comes to live permanently so I wouldn't worry about them being geographically-mobile.

How would they have secured employment when there are not enough jobs for the current population?
Ok I'll answer this: often times immigrants move around within the country. Unless, of course, they are not affluent enough to move.

As for your second question, those who have secured employment are usually skilled workers (think engineers, IT, software types). If the country is having a shortage of these people, they try to get immigrant workers to do it. In the US, there is also an impression that immigrant workers work 'harder' than native born ones. They are often more tolerant (or maybe less able to combat) things like workplace harassment and wage theft.

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 06:10 PM
If you invite a bunch of immigrants, then won't they push out the poorer, pre-existing residents?
In what sense?

Immigrants have no impact employment or on native wages - though it's probably the case they do have an impact on the employment of other immigrants. In fact I see there as being a valid argument that immigration has a positive impact on low-skill native wages (Foged and Perri 2015 (http://ftp.iza.org/dp8961.pdf)). Though, claiming that, I am more inclined to settle at no effect given the dearth of corroborating research.

---

Keep going with this, Btw. These are good points, even though I'm pretty certain you don't believe them at all.

Well an immigrant is someone that comes to live permanently so I wouldn't worry about them being geographically-mobile.
I was referring to the natives that don't like immigrants.

:)

---

Porpoise is also correct. Immigrants have a higher level of geographical mobility than natives. Though, the plan I propose would restrict that.

How would they have secured employment when there are not enough jobs for the current population?
Would you mind expanding on what you mean by 'when there are not enough jobs for the current population'. If you mean, the unemployment rate never hits zero, that is because of a phenomenon known as frictional unemployment, which essentially refers to people moving between jobs.

If there are no labour shortages then immigrants couldn't come, anyways. But, at 3% - 5% you usually begin to see sectoral labour shortages.

What economic benefits?
Better matching in the labour market leading to efficiency gains: productivity growth, output growth, wage growth.

The usual good stuff.

I could see that if a run down city is chosen it could boost the economy or if a city is to be built it could but other than that the only economic benefit I can see is a boost from cheaper labour which is illegal and I don't believe would really boost the economy.
t the same time we find robust evidence that they increased total factor productivity, on the one hand, while they decreased capital intensity and the skill-bias of production technologies, on the other.

[...] Combining these effects, an increase in employment in a US state of 1% due to immigrants produced an increase in income per worker of 0.5% in that state [actually counting the GDP impact].

(Peri 2012 (http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/REST_a_00137?journalCode=rest#.V6J5tvkrKUk))

In general, economic growth has to do with productivity gains.

Porpoise101
August 3rd, 2016, 06:26 PM
In what sense?

Keep going with this, Btw. These are good points, even though I'm pretty certain you don't believe them at all.
Well you caught me :D

But I was trying to say that if you bring in a bunch of affluent skilled workers, prices for housing will increase and lower income residents will be forced to leave. At least, this has happened due to domestic migration where places like Seattle have become much more expensive to live in because of the increased amount of richer people.

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 06:34 PM
At least, this has happened due to domestic migration where places like Seattle have become much more expensive to live in because of the increased amount of richer people.
The evidence here seems mixed.

Whilst an expanding population, and a stationary stock of housing, would seem to encourage upward pressure on housing prices, in reality there seems to be a rather significant effect where-by richer natives choose to sell their houses, and move from areas with increasing proportions of immigration.

It's something I do need to read into more, though, so don't quote me on this post, exactly.

Paraxiom
August 3rd, 2016, 07:12 PM
Vlerchan

I welcome the idea and experimentation of such an entity, taking it's quite different from many things I have heard on the immigrant/immigration topic range. Something like a 'trial run' region for immigrants wanting to gain full entry into a country?

(Apologies if I misunderstand you.)

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 07:23 PM
Something like a 'trial run' region for immigrants wanting to gain full entry into a country?
Nope. What I put in the OP is the full extent of the plan.

Paraxiom
August 3rd, 2016, 08:04 PM
Nope. What I put in the OP is the full extent of the plan.

I'd appreciate what you mean by economic benefit and a geographically-mobile populace, then. I'm lost :/ (but I'm still for it anyway).

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 08:08 PM
I'd appreciate what you mean by economic benefit and a geographically-mobile populace, then. I'm lost :/ (but I'm still for it anyway).
Economic benefit refers to productivity enhancements, output and wage growth.

Geographically-mobile populace, is intended to refers to the natives being able to leave the city if they have an issue with brown people.

(That's the spirit. I always appreciate enthusiasm, so don't worry about questions at all.)

Paraxiom
August 3rd, 2016, 08:27 PM
Geographically-mobile populace, is intended to refers to the natives being able to leave the city if they have an issue with brown people.

Alright, I get that. The natives are not obliged to reside in that city.

What is it about these cities that make them international? You are referring to 'the government', so I presume one state is setting some region aside for at least one of these cities, but that sounds more like a meta-state region than something international, like a co-op between certain govts.


Economic benefit refers to productivity enhancements, output and wage growth.

(If I am being difficult or am still not fully following what you are saying, you can correct me.)



(That's the spirit. I always appreciate enthusiasm, so don't worry about questions at all.)

The questions fuel us all.

Flapjack
August 3rd, 2016, 08:31 PM
Would you mind expanding on what you mean by 'when there are not enough jobs for the current population'. If you mean, the unemployment rate never hits zero, that is because of a phenomenon known as frictional unemployment, which essentially refers to people moving between jobs.

If there are no labour shortages then immigrants couldn't come, anyways. But, at 3% - 5% you usually begin to see sectoral labour shortages.

I am not anti immigrant at all buddy and oh so you want only immigrants with in demand skills to come? I don't think that would justify an entire city for them? I also am all for letting in immigrants that have no skills because we're all humans:)

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 08:31 PM
What is it about these cities that make them international? You are referring to 'the government', so I presume one state is setting some region aside for at least one of these cities, but that sounds more like a meta-state region that something international, like a co-op between certain govts.
Largelly, I wanted a snappy title.

Though, the internationally-diverse composition of these cities lends itself to that title (people tend to refer to London and NY as international cities for the same reason).

---

You are also correct on geographical-mobility.

I am not anti immigrant at all buddy and oh so you want only immigrants with in demand skills to come? I don't think that would justify an entire city for them?
It's not an entire city for them. The aim, using an example, would be to reduce immigration restrictions for just London.

I just want immigrants that have skills in demand to come, is correct. Having them just be unemployed here sounds like it might invite public angst and undermine the project.

I also am all for letting in immigrants that have no skills because we're all humans
Yeah, I'm not too keen on this one. Importing the unemployable sounds like courting disaster.

Paraxiom
August 3rd, 2016, 08:41 PM
Largelly, I wanted a snappy title.

Though, the internationally-diverse composition of these cities lends itself to that title (people tend to refer to London and NY as international cities for the same reason).

That's alright then, I get you.

(I will return to this tomorrow, must rest for now.)


You are also correct on geographical-mobility.


I've earned my gold star!

Flapjack
August 3rd, 2016, 08:48 PM
Yeah, I'm not too keen on this one. Importing the unemployable sounds like courting disaster.
Ya know my dad is dating this Filipino girl that came to the UK with no skills and worked as a post man and now she is studying Psychology at Cambridge, I don't look at immigrants as unemployable, I see that they have not been given the same opportunities as us:)

Vlerchan
August 3rd, 2016, 08:54 PM
Ya know my dad is dating this Filipino girl that came to the UK with no skills and worked as a post man and now she is studying Psychology at Cambridge, I don't look at immigrants as unemployable, I see that they have not been given the same opportunities as us:)
I don't look at immigrants as unemployable either. But I do look at immigrants with a skillset unsuited to the prevailing economic climate as undermining the chances for the rest of them.

---

She also would have come over as a low-skill worker to fill a temporary labour shortage (like current Tier 3 (http://www.workpermit.com/uk/uk-immigration-tier-system/tier-3-unskilled-migration.htm)), because there was labour shortages. In other words, on the ethos my post encourages.

Flapjack
August 3rd, 2016, 09:06 PM
I don't look at immigrants as unemployable either. But I do look at immigrants with a skillset unsuited to the prevailing economic climate as undermining the chances for the rest of them.

---

She also would have come over as a low-skill worker to fill a temporary labour shortage (like current Tier 3 (http://www.workpermit.com/uk/uk-immigration-tier-system/tier-3-unskilled-migration.htm)), because there was labour shortages. In other words, on the ethos my post encourages.
Wouldn't there be shortages everywhere though? So there won't just be immigrant cities? I also think we should encourage immigrants to settle in areas with a high majority race population :) So white for Ireland:)

You're a really smart guy buddy and as far as I can tell your suggestions make the greatest economic sense but I don't like looking at people as numbers ya know? I think I empathise too much and that is why I should never be a world leader xD If I had my way I'd let in everyone that didn't have a criminal record as long as the country could afford it:)

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 07:32 AM
Vlerchan

How would the management of these 'international' cities work? For example, what laws would be different in them?

What form would the city boundary take?

Porpoise101
August 4th, 2016, 09:35 AM
Geographically-mobile populace, is intended to refers to the natives being able to leave the city if they have an issue with brown people.
There is a phenomenon in the US that this reminds me of. In the 50s and 60s, racism artificially pushed whites out of the cities into suburbs. Detroit is an extreme case of this 'white flight'. Nowadays, as more middle/upper class minorities move into the suburbs (mostly Asians, but also others), new 'exurbs' have formed. These are sizable, but remote towns and cities where whites move to. The most notable one is Coeur d'Alene in Idaho, but in Michigan there is a place called Howell (also used to be a KKK base).

Vlerchan
August 4th, 2016, 03:48 PM
Wouldn't there be shortages everywhere though?
No, there wouldn't be. There might even be times where there are no shortages at all.

So there won't just be immigrant cities?
In Europe, you needn't even have secured employment to be allowed to work in different states. Whilst there was an undoubted increase in immigration, we do not have 'immigrant citys'.

I also think we should encourage immigrants to settle in areas with a high majority race population So white for Ireland
Why-so?

You're a really smart guy buddy and as far as I can tell your suggestions make the greatest economic sense but I don't like looking at people as numbers ya know?
I'm unsure how you intend to make policy at a macro-level, if you can't stand to see people as just numbers - or resources.

I don't think what you believe is uncommon though, even if I have no issue with seeing people as just numbers from a policy-perspective.

---

I'm also doubtful I'd make a good political leader, while we're on it, too.

How would the management of these 'international' cities work? For example, what laws would be different in them?
I don't see a reason to diverge from current practices, do you?

Perhaps a reduction in the current levels of labour protection, but that's something I support independent of this.

What form would the city boundary take?
The same as the current municipal ones.

There is a phenomenon in the US that this reminds me of. In the 50s and 60s, racism artificially pushed whites out of the cities into suburbs.
Something that hasn't ended at all today. There's been a considerable number of whites choose to leave London in the past decade, for similar reasons.

In Ireland, Irish schools only started to crop up as an actual thing with the arrival of Eastern European immigration.

Flapjack
August 4th, 2016, 04:31 PM
I said:
I also think we should encourage immigrants to settle in areas with a high majority race population So white for Ireland
You said:


Why-so?


I think an increase in ethnic diversity decreases racism and xenophobia and of course islamophobia:)

Porpoise101
August 4th, 2016, 04:35 PM
Something that hasn't ended at all today. There's been a considerable number of whites choose to leave London in the past decade, for similar reasons.
In Detroit, the remains of the city are left with a majority black populace. Even the old immigrant groups like the Poles and Greeks have left to the suburbs for the most part. Nowadays, the more affluent immigrants go to their respective suburbs/towns to settle down. For example: Asians live in Novi, Chaldeans/Balkan peoples live in Sterling Heights, Arabs in Dearborn. Around Detroit, there are a few white blue collar towns like Hamtramk and River Rouge. And the last rich whites around the city live on the Nautical Mile (lakefront manors = too much money to lose by moving).

Essentially, this has all enriched the suburbs while starving the city. And now it's really struggling to get new businesses/residents because of crime. But since the crime part is improving, white hipster types and some businesses have come. Your plan would probably help the city, but hurt the surrounding communities.

Paraxiom
August 4th, 2016, 04:41 PM
I don't see a reason to diverge from current practices, do you?

Perhaps a reduction in the current levels of labour protection, but that's something I support independent of this.


The same as the current municipal ones.


I was mostly wondering; overall it certainly sounds worth at least experimental practice.

Vlerchan
August 4th, 2016, 04:53 PM
Your plan would probably help the city, but hurt the surrounding communities.
You believe it will shift capital-investment from the suburbs to the city? Or something else.

Porpoise101
August 4th, 2016, 05:05 PM
You believe it will shift capital-investment from the suburbs to the city? Or something else.
Yes, for many reasons. Companies, if they haven't moved from Michigan, have moved to suburbs. Even Chrysler moved to a suburb called Auburn Hills for a 'better working environment'. They could move back. The fact that more of the immigrants would head for the cities instead of suburbs now would also mean that local taxation would suffer somewhat. So suburbs won't be able to fund things like social services as well. Immigrants would also make businesses in the cities instead of suburbs. In my opinion, the schools would become less competitive in suburbs and more so in cities. As the quality of life increases in the city, then I would also wager that some of the non racist white people will even move in.