- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Scott Bessent just summed up the migration crisis for America
Posted on 7/6/25 at 1:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 7/6/25 at 1:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
And the people who will get the bump in salary won't be making enough to have an abundance of extra money to invest. They'll still be in the lower-level earning demographics, and still struggling economically.
In other words, why cast pearls before swine?
1
Posted on 7/6/25 at 1:45 pm to GetMeOutOfHere
No. We're talking economics here.
The reason I phrased it in that way is to cut off the "more money being spent by those getting higher wages" argument off at the knees before anyone could try to make it.
The data show that these population cohorts are the least likely to invest, which means less capital to develop more productive economic areas, which means overall this policy will be negative in terms of growth and economic development, which will ultimately hurt these population cohorts in time.
The reason I phrased it in that way is to cut off the "more money being spent by those getting higher wages" argument off at the knees before anyone could try to make it.
The data show that these population cohorts are the least likely to invest, which means less capital to develop more productive economic areas, which means overall this policy will be negative in terms of growth and economic development, which will ultimately hurt these population cohorts in time.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 1:48 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
are the working class in cities without immigration in this country are doing better, high wages than the ones with mass immigration... 
This post was edited on 7/6/25 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 7/6/25 at 1:53 pm to Penrod
quote:
Yes. Venezuela, Colombia, Cuba and other Latin American countries have done so.
Not capitalist economies
quote:
Sweden and the UK both went through periods of nationalizing industries until the wealth destruction of socialism forced the UK in the late 70’s and Sweden in the 1990s to reimplement capitalism.
The UK and Sweden did not move to more collectivist policies due a growing wealth gap; it was in response to massive population and infrastructure issues following WWII.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 2:14 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
who woulda thunk it right? Mr Potato head and his team really put us in a bad spot.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 2:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Nobody has been able to explain how this would work
Yes they have you just don't like it.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 2:33 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Successful people who have money to invest having to pay more for goods (due to the inflationary pressure of higher wages) means less money will be spent elsewhere, especially in investing.
Your economic illiteracy is showing its ugly head again.
Costs don't raise prices, supply and demand raise prices for a product. All else equal, if my costs increase I will not be able to pass that onto consumers. Supply can be altered if the cost input has caused my total manufacturing cost to exceed the price the market will bear, so I have to quit producing my product. Then supply tightens and prices increase. Given the performance of stocks, the argument is we're well away from this level, and profit margins have been inflated by illegal immigration which benefits no Americans.
So there it's been explained, you don't like it so you'll make some ineffectual argument against it, but we're not required to guide discussions through your myopic rerard aperture.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 3:16 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
This is all true, but drives me nuts that they only talk about damage to the working blue collar class. Unfettered immigration is hurting white collar too, but it’s just a “don’t talk about that, focus on blue collar” cover up.
The techbros are the one’s taking advantage of it all now.
Infuriating.
The techbros are the one’s taking advantage of it all now.
Infuriating.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 3:50 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
So there it's been explained, you don't like it so you'll make some ineffectual argument against it, but we're not required to guide discussions through your myopic rerard aperture.
quote:
Supply can be altered if the cost input has caused my total manufacturing cost to exceed the price the market will bear
The flawed assumption. The market will bear the higher price in most of these areas (as they're often essential goods), but will have less to spend elsewhere as a result. That's the point.
quote:
so I have to quit producing my product.
And this is the forced end point of your flawed assumption above.
quote:
Then supply tightens and prices increase.
However, even assuming your assumption isn't flawed, this is its own negative impact on our overall economy/GDP.
quote:
and profit margins have been inflated by illegal immigration which benefits no Americans.
Except the Americans getting the higher profits, those who enjoy them derivatively (via stocks/investments/ownership), and the benefits we all experience due to the lower prices.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 3:51 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Yes they have
Update: they have not.
At least you did try, so you're the first.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 3:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The 2 parties have abandoned capitalists and capitalism.
Slowflo baby..... that's even a low blow for you. Go to the penalty box for 2 weeks!
Posted on 7/6/25 at 3:59 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No. We're talking economics here.
The reason I phrased it in that way is to cut off the "more money being spent by those getting higher wages" argument off at the knees before anyone could try to make it.
The data show that these population cohorts are the least likely to invest, which means less capital to develop more productive economic areas, which means overall this policy will be negative in terms of growth and economic development, which will ultimately hurt these population cohorts in time.
If we remove 10 million illegals willing to work for less than market wages, you'll see more Americans working and for better wages at the bottom. This should impact government spending on illegals and American poor, which means fedgov is in the capital markets less for funding - which frees up capital for private investment.
It's stupid to argue the inefficiencies resulting from millions of imported cheap labor are actually economic development drivers.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
Here comes the great walls of text
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:06 pm to David_DJS
quote:
which means fedgov is in the capital markets less for funding - which frees up capital for private investment.
So the end goal of this is...public funding of capital investments? Directed by government bureaucrats I presume?
quote:
It's stupid to argue the inefficiencies resulting from millions of imported cheap labor are actually economic development drivers.
I'm discussing one variable that Bessent called an efficiency (by labeling the wages are being suppressed).
I'm all about working on alternate variables, like welfare, but that still isn't going to be with the goal of increasing wages, either. We want less valuable work having lower wages, not higher. I mean even with welfare and illegal immigration, plenty of Americans are working for wages below "slave wages" who either can't, or won't, take jobs with higher salaries (and corresponding skill/output demands)
In an ideal system we have less welfare, fewer regulations, and more lenient immigration (at least for work purposes) to foster a more meritocratic society and economy.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:07 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
Here comes the great walls of text
This discussion is above your ability. I'm not shocked that's your response
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No. We're talking economics here.
Some people are, you're not one of them.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The 2 parties have abandoned capitalists and capitalism.
How did you pull that out of interview? I mean holy stretch bro!
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So the end goal of this is...public funding of capital investments? Directed by government bureaucrats I presume?
This is retarded.
quote:
I'm all about working on alternate variables, like welfare, but that still isn't going to be with the goal of increasing wages, either. We want less valuable work having lower wages, not higher. I mean even with welfare and illegal immigration, plenty of Americans are working for wages below "slave wages" who either can't, or won't, take jobs with higher salaries (and corresponding skill/output demands)
How about we let the market determine all of this shite? Get rid of the illegals, who don't belong in the labor pool and let's see how things settle out.
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:11 pm to ABearsFanNMS
quote:
How did you pull that out of interview? I mean holy stretch bro!
How do you describe enacting governmental policy to create purposeful market inefficiencies in order to redistribute wealth from the "haves" to the "have nots"?
Posted on 7/6/25 at 4:13 pm to David_DJS
quote:
This is retarded
This is what you said
quote:
which means fedgov is in the capital markets less for funding - which frees up capital for private investment.
From where is that capital for private investments originating?
quote:
How about we let the market determine all of this shite?
That's what I'm trying to do
Bessent specifically indicates he's trying to take from "Wall Street" to artificially give higher salaries to "Main Street"
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News