An Idea for Immigration

Oneuli said:
I'm fine with importing skill sets in the short term, but I would make those special visas time-bounded, such that at a particular point you not only couldn't retain the imported worker, but you couldn't import a new worker with that skill set. That would give the public and private sector an incentive to train up native-born workers to fill those niches before the stop-gap measure expired. For example, if we have too few people with training in high-temperature engineering to meet the demand because of some hot new technology, let companies here bring in workers for the next three years to staff those positions, but after that, they don't get those special visas for high-temperature engineers. So, they'll have an incentive to pay for continuing education for their native-born engineers to build those skills, or an incentive to finance scholarships or to pressure the government to do so, to fill that need with native workers.

Regarding the dependency ratio, here you go:

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.DPND.OL

https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docse...est&checksum=6CDF85AC451C8203C7DCC5874FD27453

As you can see, even with the Millennials, we're projected to go from an old-age dependency ratio of 24.6% in 2015 to one of 40.3 in three decades (when most of the Millennials will still be working age). In the 1970s through 1990s, we were under 20%.
Click to expand...

I am not seeing how they get that calculation of 40.3 in 3 decades. The Boomer generation will mostly be dead. My generation will be in the 65+ category. The front edge of the millenials will be as well. But the bulk of the echo boomers will still be working as you mentioned. It should plummet for a decade or so based on my generation. What happens when Echo boomers hit will depend largely on the number of kids they and their kids have. With our replacement rate hovering just below 2, there could be a problem, assuming advanced technologies and efficiencies don't compensate.
 
Superfreak said:
I am not seeing how they get that calculation of 40.3 in 3 decades.
Click to expand...

I don't have inside information on the methodology, but I expect it's based on a combination of actuarial tables and historical projections. You know who is already in the country, so you just apply mortality trend lines to them and you can figure out a rough demographic mix of who will be alive in 30 years. You also need to account for 14 years of anticipated births (since those born in the first 14 years of that 30-year period will be 16 or older in 30 years, putting them in the "working age" category for purposes of that stat. You estimate that by applying known historical probabilities of people of given ages having children, and applying that to the mix of people at those ages, giving you an educated guess about the number of babies per year over the next 14 years.

There's going to be a lot of uncertainty there, since you can't account for an unanticipated baby boom in the next few years (or a big surge in youthful immigration, or a 1918-style pandemic that disproportionately slaughters the young, etc.) But it's probably good enough for a decent projection.

The Baby Boomers were born between 1946 and 1964. So, in 2050, they'd be between 104 and 86. Obviously, nearly all those born in 1946 will be gone. Almost half of those born in 1964 will still be around (life expectancy for a 55-year-old today is about 27 years, and that figure has tended to rise over time, meaning those youngest boomers will be dying, on average, around 2046, if not later.... that's going to mean a whole bunch of them still alive in 2050. I agree MOST Boomers will be dead by then, but there will still be quite a few. And meanwhile not only will all the Xers be in the old age group, but so will 1/3 of the Millennial generation. And Millennials have been having kids at the lowest rate of any generation in history, so their echo generation will be a birth dearth.

The numbers look plausible to me, in light of that. We're setting up for another situation like with the Boomers being followed by Gen X, when the Millennials are followed by a small generation, only this time, with the overhang of a bunch of old Boomers still being around to further add to the imbalance.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
End all immigration, until we figure out and finally take care of the homeless and welfare problems we have in the US.

Then we can begin being concerned about those who aren't US citizens.

It's common knowledge that you can't help someone else, if you can't even help yourself.
Click to expand...

But you don't want to help the homeless in this country.

YOUR heartless party wants to cut funding that helps the homeless.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
But you don't want to help the homeless in this country.

YOUR heartless party wants to cut funding that helps the homeless.
Click to expand...

We spend LOTS of money in California on the homeless and the problem is only worsening. What is it we are missing if more money isn’t the answer?
 
Oneuli said:
I hope one of those undocumented residents will Antonio Díaz Chacón one of your family members.
Click to expand...

I take care of my own and don't need some fucking wetback to do it for me. Let's get back to the illegals you support that commit more crimes other than the one they committed by coming here against the law and how, hopefully, one will Kate Steinle your family member.
 
Oneuli said:
There isn't. That's the problem. Even if you have a close connection to the US, there is a decades-long wait to come here from some countries. For example:

"A U.S. permanent resident’s unmarried son or daughter, who is 21 years old or older, will have to wait roughly 21 years to file an application for an immigrant visa if they’re from Mexico."

That's unreasonable, and it's the reason that people who'd much rather go through legitimate channels instead despair and come here illegally. We should change the rules to make the path more reasonable.
Click to expand...

Tough shit for those that don't like it. There's a path and the last time I looked, the end users don't get a say in what that is. They can either follow it and if they don't, hopefully one of them you approve of breaking the rules will Kate Steinle your family member.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
But you don't want to help the homeless in this country.

YOUR heartless party wants to cut funding that helps the homeless.
Click to expand...

You're being given a chance to prove you care about the homeless. As expected, you failed for two reasons. First, you refuse, personally to help them. Secondly, you demand that someone else be forced to do what you won't do voluntarily.
 
reagansghost said:
you sure have a hang-up about skin color, eh?
Click to expand...

Don't confuse pointing out that people like you were stupid enough to think it was a qualification with a hang up. Someone has to educate you dumbasses, that is, if you're capable of learning.
 
CFM said:
Don't confuse pointing out that people like you were stupid enough to think it was a qualification with a hang up. Someone has to educate you dumbasses, that is, if you're capable of learning.
Click to expand...

I was correct, you're freakin obsessed with color!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top