Perhaps in making that statement I am misreading what you are actually saying.HondurasKeiser wrote:
Good questions Appleman, I am not sure if I have the answers to them but I'll do my best. I do have a question about one of your assertions though. You wrote: "If you are suggesting no immigration than may I also suggest that means no trade." I am no sure I see the axiomatic connection between the two. Why is one contingent upon the other?
But often people that make the argument that we do not need immigration and that immigration simply hurts the ability of those already here to get jobs are implying that if we just paid workers more here or paid them better wages or benefits that in fact we could fill all of our needs without immigration. Maybe that is not what you are saying and if it is not I am even more interested in what your solution might be.
The case could be made that if we did not bring in a single thing from any other country and had to be self sufficient and a world to ourselves then this might be possible. But if I in growing my apples have to compete with countries that pay a fraction of the wages we do then ultimately there is a limit to what I can pay. Do you get what I am saying?
For this reason trade is linked very closely to immigration.