Cross-Posted from Fash The Nation
The most shortsighted argument for mass immigration is that it is good for the economy. This canard, which gets brought out repeatedly throughout the West, ignores many real and serious impacts to a nation’s culture that go beyond GDP growth.
These arguments are encapsulated in the latest spew of Jessica Irvine from the Sydney Morning Herald: If Australia Halted Immigration
First, notice that this article has had comments disabled. Isn’t it interesting how the articles most worthy of comments are never allowed on these news sites? Yet, you are free to comment on Sportsball to your heart’s content.
Secondly, this article was a response to a recent Australian poll that found half of Australians wants to ban Muslim immigration entirely
(a similar position to our glorious leader Donald Trump).
Those aren’t just conservatives being part of the evil media narrative. No, this figure also includes 1/3rd of left-wing Green Party voters in Australia. This shows that banning Muslim immigration is not a fringe view despite what the media says.
The poll numbers are likely more than half if you consider that some people will not answer a pollster truthfully for fear of repercussions from politically correct commissars ruining their lives. In fact, if the poll were broadened to encompass mass immigration in general, you’d probably find similar results of most people wanting it stopped.
All we ask is that you let us work to fund your retirement. We exist only to serve your GDP
The arguments for mass immigration and the economy are all classic “We must grow the GDP above all other reasons or we will die” variety. Let’s review these arguments in this article.
Claim: Population Growth Would Halve
So what? How does having more crowded cities, highways, schools, and communities make everyone happier? In terms of Australia, would a massive population increase solve their arable land and water concerns?
I can’t think of a single country that will have their social and environmental problems solved by adding more people to the situation.
Claim: Economic Growth Would Falter
“Australia's quarter century of uninterrupted growth is due in no small part to a swelling population. That makes us quite different to a lot of other countries across the world who have got the challenge of population growth that's slowing, or shrinking, like Japan.’”
Again, so what? Japan is an advanced society that produces the top technological innovation on the planet. They are not going to be improved by a massive wave of third-world immigration to their shores. They have success more than a stock growth chart can ever show.
Japan is an extremely safe, innovative, and advanced country that looks out for their people first. The Japanese do not live in a police state because Japan does not import people that spontaneously explode, hijack planes, stab people randomly, run children over with trucks, and form rape gangs that prey on women. Doesn’t that sound a lot better than having an extra 0.5% GDP growth from hostile immigration?
Claim: Our Workforce Would Age Faster
“The median age of all new arrivals to Australia last financial year was 26.5, according to Australian Bureau of Statistics. This includes temporary and permanent visa holders. The median age of the entire Australian population was 37 years.”
Mass immigration puts tremendous strain on social services and drives up costs of native citizens family formation. The effect of mass immigration is not a lower average age in the workforce, but a decline in native citizens having larger families because it is too expensive.
Most white Western people plan ahead for family costs before having kids. An immigrant from a third-world region and his eight children do not. Considering that most immigrants from third-world regions use government benefits for the rest of their lives, why should they care if it is too expensive for you to have a larger family? They aren’t paying the bills, you are.
Further, white Western companies work well because white people run them. Australia (and all Western nations) cannot repeat the same success with an imported workforce from random cultures. If it were that easy, then these other countries with huge young populations could just copy what Western countries do and be successful where they are, right?
Claim: The Federal Budget Would Blow Out
“With no new migrants arriving, there would be fewer working aged people to pay the income taxes needed to support an ageing population.”
Nobody is moving to a Western country to support retiring white people. Once an imported population gains political clout, they simply vote for politicians that funnel funds to them and their kids. After all, the left tells these groups constantly that whites are racist, wicked people that cause all their problems. Why would the imported help feel any compulsion to pay for white people’s retirement?
Besides, what kind of a policy is it to pirate off people from countries that need them more than we do? Even worse, you are pirating them with the idea that they are going to support your champagne and caviar retirement. That doesn’t sound like the compassionate open borders left I hear so much about. That sounds like vile selfish people.
Claim: Roads Would Remain Crowded, Housing Expensive
Importing huge numbers of people is not going to result in less crowded roads and cheaper housing. It adds more people on the roads and more people competing in the housing market. Economists always forget basic rules of supply and demand when to shilling for open borders.
Besides, why should citizens want to give up their country to mass immigration just so they get some extra lanes on a highway? Wouldn’t they rather have a cheaper house closer to the city? Isn’t that a better idea than being forced to live far away and commute due to mass immigration driving up housing costs?
Claim: Tourism and Education Would Suffer
Why couldn’t people visit on a tourist visa and leave like today? Plus, universities should be for domestic students first and foremost. The globalist elite always complains about the lack of educated people and wants to import them instead to fill this supposedly shortage. Well, why not educate the locals first in the universities their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents built for them as intended?
Universities have drifted from their mandate to educate citizens first. When did importing foreign students become a priority over educating our own (hint: money)? Other countries should educate their own students and leave our universities for our own people.
Claim: It'd Be Harder to Find a Doctor
“Angela Julian-Armitage is a barrister and national president of the Migration Institute of Australia, a body representing Australia's migration lawyers and agents …
Without immigration, she says: ‘The skilled occupation lists would never get filled. Seeing doctors and nurses would be harder for everyone. A lot of businesses would have to close. Universities would collapse without international students' income. We would have a rapidly diminishing taxation base to fund the running of the country and the ageing population, and - most of all - Australians who married a non-Australian overseas could not bring in their new spouse.’”
An immigration lawyer that makes her money from immigration, says stopping immigration is bad? Shocker.
Her statement is pure non-sense, including the idea that someone couldn’t bring in their spouse. I’ve never seen any immigration policy, even one from a very restrictive country like Japan, which does that.
Without me, where would your backwards country be today?
How does she think Australia became so successful up until the early 1970s when there was an extremely strict whites-only immigration policy? Did Australia not have any first-world services and features? Or do these people actually believe that it was the benefit of multicultural immigration that brought these things to Australia and other Western countries? Good thing we got those Muslim immigrants or we never would have electricity, right?
Conclusion: Mass Immigration is Bad for Western Countries
There are quality of life issues to consider that go beyond the economy. Mass immigration in fact destroys the society that gives us a good economy. Halting mass immigration would benefit Western countries in the following ways:
We wouldn’t need a security state to watch everyone for terrorism because we are not importing groups hostile to our own people.
Housing prices would drop to reasonable levels and we wouldn’t need more roads to carry people on long commutes.
Our schools would be for our own children without wasting resources on imported children and their problems.
Cost of living would decline. It would be cheaper to support a large family because we won’t be importing other’s poverty and dysfunction that steals from us.
We can spend government resources exclusively for our own benefit instead of on imported people that hate our way of life and our beliefs.
The problems our countries have would be ours alone. We can work to solve them to our own benefit without worrying about the feelings of others that have different goals for being here.
The reason why Western countries are the #1 immigration destination today is because they are already great. It’s not because these countries are broken and can only be fixed by secret mass immigration magic.
The truth is that an economy exists for a nation. The nation does not exist for the economy. When the economy works to destroy the nation with immigration, it is time for the economy to change, not the nation.
A nation is more than GDP growth on a chart. It’s about the people and culture that built the place. That can’t be fixed by swamping it with people who do not share our values.
It’s time for all Western countries to radically change their failed immigration policies that are destroying our societies. Mass immigration, and an economy that relies on it to succeed, is a horrible idea and must be stopped.