[sol_remmy2]

> This is a surprisingly common take on the literature, with an unlikely consensus among both the conservative and radical left, libertarians and conservative libertarians, and even many on the conservative side.

I hate asking but mind citing some sources?

Economic consensus is that labor pool operates on supply/demand, so greatly increase the supply through immigration will reduce demand and therefore reduce salaries. This part of the reason for why doctors have such high salaries: their supply is limited because only X number of people can become doctors each year and demand is very high.

Saying that an increased supply of workers does not affect highly commoditized jobs like cooks and construction works is an unusual claim and I would appreciate a source so i can review their arguments.

[isodude]

If people move to the city they work in, they would not only be workers but also citizens. Thus increasing the supply of workers. But also the amount of consumers. It's a two way street. Importing work force that only work during the day and then leave is however bad I would say. People that are sick are also a toll (that's expected to yield return someday, future investment).

That is just my uneducated take on it.

When I search for the terms immigration wages I get the following sources:

https://www.sns.se/en/archive/effects-of-immigration-on-nati... https://fullfact.org/immigration/immigration-wages/