It goes back to the initial point, "it depends on where you sit"
and encompasses how you define "good for the economy." If you own a business that can train people quickly and doesn't require native speakers, or you are a consumer that likes cheap fruit or lawn services, then it's good. If you are a legal part of the relevant workforce, it pushes your wages down.
Who is defining labor surplus or shortage, or who is over/under paid? The point is these are political questions, not mathematical economic truisms when someone says something like "illegal immigration is good for the economy in aggregate."
EDIT: This issue will take on a greater political imperative once it starts affecting higher numbers of well-educated, politically connected professionals, which it will in the not-too-distant future.
[Post edited by hoodeyo at 04/16/2017 4:54PM]
|
(
In response to this post by CharlestonSC)
Posted: 04/16/2017 at 4:42PM