Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Anna Krupitsky's avatar

My devil's advocate argument would be that there is more to the public's skepticism than just data. It's tribal, cultural, and emotional. Although it's true that minds are resistant to change, it would be inaccurate to ignore the depth of this resistance by dismissing it as ignorance. Even with an impenetrable model, people would continue to advocate for "America First."

Furthermore, even though "build a wall around the welfare state" makes sense in theory, too many voters adore their benefits and don't care who foots the bill, making it an unpopular political strategy in reality. Voters are unlikely to support a policy that singles out immigrants for exclusion if they don't give a damn about who pays for it. Even though the logic is sound, it could worsen the situation by inciting a backlash (imagine charges of "unfairness" or "discrimination"). Politicians are aware of this and would prefer to accommodate it rather than propose a solution that might annoy voters.

Expand full comment
forumposter123@protonmail.com's avatar

"Even low-skilled workers contribute something to society besides taxes."

Yeah, they take up space, dilute the existing capital stock per capita, vote differently (worse) then natives, and degrade social trust and pro-social action.

Expand full comment
18 more comments...