Friday, 8 July 2016


Joseph Stiglitz is the Left's favourite economist. Whenever you need someone to bash "the bankers" or free trade deals, or argue in favour of government intervention, he is your go-to guy. The fact that he has a Nobel prize is the seal of his credibility to the credulous. Anywhere a bunch of crazed leftists get anywhere near power - from Scotland to Greece - they usually sign Stiglitz up as an adviser. His pronouncements on immigration following the Brexit vote must therefore have greatly discomfited his besotted admirers.
Many refugees are victims of war and oppression to which the West contributed. Providing help is a moral responsibility of all, but especially of the ex-colonial powers. 
And yet, while many might deny it, an increase in the supply of low-skill labor leads – so long as there are normal downward-sloping demand curves – to lower equilibrium wages. And when wages can’t or won’t be lowered, unemployment increases. This is of most concern in countries where economic mismanagement has already led to a high level of overall unemployment. Europe, especially the eurozone, has been badly mismanaged in recent decades, to the point that its average unemployment is in double digits. Free migration within Europe means that countries that have done a better job at reducing unemployment will predictably end up with more than their fair share of refugees. 
Workers in these countries bear the cost in depressed wages and higher unemployment, while employers benefit from cheaper labor. The burden of refugees, no surprise, falls on those least able to bear it. Of course, there is much talk about the net benefits of inward migration. For a country providing a low level of guaranteed benefits – social protection, education, health care, and so forth – to all citizens, that may be the case. But for countries that provide a decent social safety net, the opposite is true.
Source

2 comments:

  1. En términos deportivos, sería como un resultado de ¨ goleada ¨ ( muchos goles de ventaja en el marcador final ) y con un último gol ; pero ésta vez introducido en el argot futbolístico como : ¨ Un gol, por toda la escuadra ¨.

    Pero, con un público algo especial, de los que juegan como locales ( juegan en casa ) no se esperan aplausos efusivos hacia sus rivales, que ya han ganado.

    Lo que aparece después de ésto, es de forma general, el éxtasis de los vencedores, y la marginalidad ( además de testarudez de los que no atienden a razones por la derrota causada ).

    No podemos subestimar a los que desean destrozar a Occidente, pero tomemos un pequeño aperitivo, de momento, para saborear éstos logros de la victoria final que ya intuimos para las personas de bien y de sentido común.

    Interesante noticia, muy bien, Diversity, muchas gracias.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Incluso nuestros amigos en Japón, lo saben, ya.

      https://youtu.be/C18_G6wIh-Y

      Delete