[abenga]

It is not a zero sum game (long term). Immigrants and their children have founded companies that have employed thousands of American citizens and created trillions of dollars of wealth. Stopping what has worked for your country because "…reasons…" is extremely shortsighted.

[AdrianB1]

It is an exception used to justify the rule. There is a very small percentage that founded companies and the rest are impacting negatively the economy.

[throwaway2037]

    > the rest are impacting negatively the economy

Can you expand this line of thinking? Is this also true for other OECD members that aggressively pursue immigration as an economic growth strategy?

[AdrianB1]

If you import cheap labor, you hit your economy by lowering the wages in that sector. When you have immigration, there are a few very top talents and a lot of average people coming, the average ones are not a net benefit in most cases. In US migrants don't create huge problems of integration and culture clashes, in Western Europe there are problems with that so the overall impact is negative.

[throwaway2037]

    > If you import cheap labor

How do you define "cheap labor"? What is your max annual income?

What happens if you import middle class and above labour? In the USA, I assume this is about 75 USD per year salary.

[charcircuit]

So foriegners should take potential investment money from American citizens because there business will have hired more American citizens than one founded by an American? I think it's more likely that they would prioritize figuring out to import non citizens, especially from the area of the world that they are from.

[abenga]

There is no "…more likely they would prioritize…". Those are nonsense hypotheticals. I am saying that the US today has many companies that were founded and built by immigrants and the children of immigrants in the past. These companies have employed millions of American citizens and created trillions of dollars of wealth for Americans. Speaking of these things as if they are zero sum games is silly and shortsighted.

[charcircuit]

>Those are nonsense hypotheticals.

In group preferences at least in tech is not a hypothetical.

I'm not denying that immigrants haven't employed millions of Americans, but that the investment for creating such companies is limited. If some product space is going to be a duopoly why not have the duopoly have American founders if possible?