Critical Thinking Exercise

I used to think...

Now I think...

Before reading the article I believed that the immigration rates should increase. The criminalization of human migration is as immoral as it is illogical. The United States was built on land stolen from natives; neither the colonizers nor their descendants have any legitimate moral claim to the territory. This criminalization results in thousands of deaths, worsens human trafficking, and represents a direct plan to violently put down the mass-migration of refugees that will inevitably come as the climate worsens. Even from a conservative perspective, immigrants overwhelmingly provide economic good to America, stimulating growth and filling labor shortages.

After reading the article, my perspective on the issue stayed the same. Immigration rates in America should increase. I weigh structural violence over economic growth, so my position would remain the same regardless of whether or not immigrants help or hurt the economy. That being said, Goldstone makes clear that immigrants are vital in terms of generating long-term economic growth. The Deloitte Institute quantifies that, without Immigrants, America will face a labor shortage of more than 2 million workers by 2030. Taking this into consideration, it is clear that increasing immigration rates is both the moral and the practical decision.

"If we want our economy to grow, what America needs more than anything is workers."

The prioritization of economic growth, and not of labor conditions, indicates that the speaker is not a leftist. While not right-wing in and of itself, this quote aligns with more classical ideologies like neoconservatism, neoliberalism, etc. that value the ostensibly free market.

"If this strikes you as good news, think again. For an economy to grow, the average worker must produce more output over time and/or more workers must be employed in productive jobs over time. Since 2005, U.S. labor productivity (that is, real GDP per employed worker) has grown slowly if at all, averaging under 1 percent per year and even turning negative in 2016."

The measurement of economic performance in terms of GDP fails to consider the material conditions of the average laborer. For this reason, GDP as a metric is often criticized as "bourgeoisie economics." This confirms that Goldstone believes in economic liberalism (which is not the equivalent of being left-wing).

"While immigration rates have declined and the growth in the working-age population has slowed to a crawl, elderly Americans are the demographic sector that is truly exploding. The number of people aged 65 and older in the United States is projected to grow from 49 million to 80 million by 2040, an annual rate of increase of 2 percent. The costs of providing pensions and health care for this group will rise at least as quickly as their numbers, but likely even more, as health care costs continue to go up faster than inflation."

The author takes a firm position against entitlements, criticizing them as a drag on the United States. This is an inherently right-wing (specifically right-libertarian) position, espoused by historical leaders like Calvin Coolidge.