|
|
|
|
|
|
by s1artibartfast
1125 days ago
|
|
|
I'm a proponent for highly trained visas, but I don't think it's disputable that they are bad for their direct local competitors. They might be good for the economy at Large, and they might be good for consumers in general, but those are different factors. As a minor note to babies comment, a baby isn't going to reduce the salary of the delivering nurse the day it comes out of the womb. If you let a million trained nurses enter the country, that would be a different story. |
|
|
Look at what’s happening to the UK after Brexit. While in the EU, non UK EU citizens essentially had super visas that allowed them to work in the UK as long as they could get a job. This changed almost entirely after Brexit.
The result? Hundreds if not thousands of businesses such as farms, fisheries, bakeries, butchers, have shut down because they can’t find employees. This has resulted in a massive net loss of jobs among UK workers themselves (workers are not fungible…to switch to a new job they require training, skill, expertise, and desire). In addition, this is helping drive up inflation in the UK so that it’s higher than nearly every country in the EU even though the UK is more protected from Russian natural gas than say Germany.
Further, its national services, such as the NHS, which is unable to find doctors and nurses where it did so far more easily before Brexit, are consequently collapsing.
So it’s very disputable that visa holders almost certainly negatively impact the local working population.