U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 01-27-2013, 03:26 PM
 
455 posts, read 872,887 times
Reputation: 438

Advertisements

What would happen if the countries that were the most sought after destinations for immigrants suddenly let open their borders and let all those who wanted to immigrate immigrate?

This chart is based upon the number of potential immigrants to each country:




What do you think the impact to each country would be if that number of immigrants were suddenly allowed to immigrate to those countries? Perhaps not literally right at the exact same time but certainly over an extended period.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-27-2013, 03:47 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,740 posts, read 39,610,543 times
Reputation: 14671
Saudia Arabia is a more popular destination than Australia?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 03:55 PM
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
11,269 posts, read 12,474,250 times
Reputation: 13422
I think there is already a thread on this started today, Mhundred.

What Would Happen If We Let All The Immigrants In?


But, WE'RE NUMBER 3! WE'RE NUMBER 3!!!!! lol I think Canada could use 42 million more folks. That would probably help us out economically, and we have the space for it.

I don't know if America could take 150 more. There's certainly the space for it though. Meh..I dunno, maybe it could work for everyone if the migration is slow enough.

I'll stay here though. My next in line would probably be America, then the UK, then Australia.

Last edited by Magnatomicflux; 01-27-2013 at 04:06 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Michigan
4,571 posts, read 6,737,482 times
Reputation: 3588
I think a large part of the US immigration would be from Mexico. If the US opened the borders, the southwestern cities would grow even faster than they are now and any other cities with large Latino populations.

But yea, I'm surprised Australia isn't higher as well. From what I've seen, Australia is one of the better quality English-speaking countries in terms of standard of living.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 04:00 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,672 posts, read 8,093,743 times
Reputation: 4818
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Saudia Arabia is a more popular destination than Australia?
Saudi Arabia has alot of cash floating around due to its oil wealth and would be a more popular destination than Australia for many of the world's over 1 billion Muslims, many of whom have visited the country when goin on Hajj and have come to fall in love with the country.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 07:27 PM
 
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
1,484 posts, read 1,644,715 times
Reputation: 1004
I can assure: the standard of living in these countries would fall down very quickly.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 08:17 PM
 
4,454 posts, read 5,486,094 times
Reputation: 2148
I surprised to see Australia ranked lower than the UK and more people rank the UK higher than Germany.

Last edited by other99; 01-27-2013 at 08:27 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 08:38 PM
 
Location: Brisbane
3,360 posts, read 5,178,606 times
Reputation: 2684
Quote:
Originally Posted by other99 View Post
I surprised to see Australia ranked lower than the UK and more people rank the UK higher than Germany.
The UK would be better known as a rich english speaking country among the worlds poor I assume.

Personally i am surprised Australia ranks as highly as it does alongside Germany.

Still the UK does seem a bit overrated , about 1/3rd of all Australians could get an EU passport, and move the the UK based on their country of birth, or their parents country of birth alone . They are not exaclty flocking over in any great numbers.

The results of such a policy would be terrible, rich cities with some of the worlds best standards of living would be transferred into areas with large multi eithnic slums, and some of the countries they are fleeing would be left economically stagnant for a lack of able bodied work force.

Last edited by danielsa1775; 01-27-2013 at 09:32 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2013, 04:31 PM
 
Location: Baldock, hertfordshire, England
770 posts, read 706,455 times
Reputation: 252
The third world/unskilled/uneducated would move to wherever the welfare is best, as milton friedman observed, the skilled would move to wherever the work was best. Basically the world would end up just as segregated as it started.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2013, 05:39 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
Meaningless Gallup Poll. Once the US population swelled by 100-million and the consequences were viewed and digested, the other 50-million would very likely change their minds, and maybe go to seek their fortunes elsewhere, possibly even in the places that the earlier migrants had fled from.

Furthermore, only a smallish fraction of those who say they "would like to" emigrate would actually possess the resources or the resolve to do so.

The projected number of people desiring to emigrate to the listed countries only adds up to less than 400-million, out of more than 4-billion in the countries of origin, who were surveyed. Which means well over 90% would rather stay home than emigrate, which says volumes by itself. It means if we opened out borders to freely admit anyone who showed up, our developed nations' populations would level off fairly quickly at what would probably be a sustainable level.

Just think: If US Medicare paid all medical expenses incurred outside the US, as well as inside, ten or twenty million retirees might leave the US to live in cheaper countries, which would readily admit them since they would not put a drain on their universal health care budgets. And it would save Medicare hundreds of billions, paying only a small fraction of the current billing for retirees health care. And this would open up space in America for 10-20 million young working immigrants, whose payroll deductions would restore Medicare and Social Security to solvency. Work all your life for American wages, then retire on Gambia's or Ecuador's or Indonesia's cost of living and health care costs. All for just one simple policy change: Stop disqualifying Medicare payments to offshore providers.

Last edited by jtur88; 01-29-2013 at 06:06 PM..
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top