Greece dumps refugees in Ocean tells Turkey Deal with it

[Solvokina]

How about we kick turkey out? They commit mass genocide in Syria ironically. Also, those are illegals, to say its genocide is an overstatement. I swear the number of people supporting turkey is actually fucked and are blinded through their crimes

[Novus America]

If supply was irrelevant to employment, involuntary unemployment would never occur!
Involuntary unemployment is by definition where the supply of workers is greater than the number of jobs!

If the demand automatically met supply, then there could be no excess supply. Yet clearly there can be more people than jobs. It is a complex situation. Sure population growth does tend to drive overall GDP growth, all other things being equal, but there are other issues such as skills mismatches (this is particularly problematic with irregular migration where the migrants do not necessarily even have basic languages skills, let alone a proper job certification), resource and and land constraints, amongst other things.

Involuntary unemployment is the situation of deficient aggregate demand, or more often, deficient current capital investment. Supply is irrelevant, because it is simply a function of demand.

Obviously, like you point out, there is frictional unemployment, but that doesn't factor into usual economic theory. Also, it's called frictional because by its very nature, it's always transient.

Also, it takes time for the market to adjust, which may result in oversupply.

If the demand automatically met supply, then there could be no excess supply. Yet clearly there can be more people than jobs.

People are not commodities to be bought or sold. The theory of employment is not part of the general theory of supply and demand. It is entirely separate.

Supply is not irrelevant, because supply determines the how much you need to increase demand.
For example if there are 100 people unemployed, a stimulus spending to give jobs to 10 people will be insufficient. Obviously the more people unemployed, the greater the stimulus will have to be.

The amount of additional investment capital needed will depend on the number who are unemployed, obviously.

People will not automatically increase capital investment to offset unemployment either. For various reasons.
And various structural constraints are not easily or automatically overcome.

Again if aggregate demand always increased to offset unemployment, all unemployment would only be short term.
Long term structural unemployment could not happen, but it does. The fact that job shortages and labor shortages can occur proves that it is not so simple and that supply and demand for labor is not always in equilibrium.

Structural and resource constraints are real issues that prevent AD from rising to meet a population increase.

[Saiwania]

You should tell your boss that your job "only exists on paper" as an excuse to not go to work. Don't be so dismissive of the economic mechanisms which have created the miracle of modern life.

Also, although the immigrants have low purchasing power, they have to spend more of their income on necessaries, as opposed to richer people, who leave a larger proportion of their income hoarded away not stimulating the economy.

Having people constantly spend money and have no savings/investments is no way to run an economy in my view. That is just more of the mindset that caused runaway global climate change to begin with. Wasteful consumerism. There is no job that exists that I'd be hired for where I live. In any case, I'm not interested in banks, the captains of industry, and other elitists getting richer at the expense of everyone else more so than needs to be the case. I'm not going to favor more immigration just so their labor costs can become lower.

If constant growth is really so important, why is every boom almost inevitably followed by a recession or castastrophic bust and the government pathetically tries to artificially blunt or micromanage? It is almost as if there are things more important than the economic numbers and that no one really knows how wealth should truly be used for the most return across the board, in terms of benefits to be enjoyed or allocated.

[Novus America]

People were at one time and still are in some contexts, even though slavery has long since been formally abolished globally. It still manages to happen all the time.

The point is, employment cannot be analyzed through the same lens as supply and demand.

Although it is different than a commodity there still are supply and demand constraints in employment.
How then would immigration ever be needed if the supply of people was unlimited? It is possible to have labor shortages and job shortages, which would be impossible if supply and demand were always in equilibrium.

Efficient markets also do not actually exist, because people are not perfectly rational and informed.

[Novus America]

How about we kick turkey out? They commit mass genocide in Syria ironically. Also, those are illegals, to say its genocide is an overstatement. I swear the number of people supporting turkey is actually fucked and are blinded through their crimes

Kick Turkey out of what exactly?

[Glorious Hong Kong]

Greece is overwhelmed with migrants and refugees, economic stagnation, and now a coronavirus pandemic. I don't blame them for feeling like they have to round up and deport these migrants. But abandoning them out at sea in leaky life rafts is a bit too much, although I honestly can't think of any other way they could've pulled off these deportations effectively without directly violating Turkey's sovereignty and without the migrants simply turning around and walking/sailing back to Greece that I would consider sufficiently humane in and of itself. We also have to bear in mind that the human smugglers responsible for their passage are far from human in their actions and behavior despite their job title.

To address the OP's hot take, calling Greece's actions a genocide is just a bad faith interpretation by the OP that represents the other hysterical, bleeding-heart, emotionally manipulative extreme in the immigration debate.

Filmmaker (and former right-wing provocateur who has since sobered up to become a "milquetoast" moderate centrist and a target of right-wing, misogynistic abuse) Lauren Southern released a documentary last year about the European migrant crisis. In it, she documented how so-called charities and NGOs collaborate with criminal human smuggling syndicates to ferry refugees to Europe with zero regard for the lives of the refugees who risk drowning at sea in the process.

This, IMO, is far more callous and inhumane than any of the drastic actions Greece has taken thus far, and yet this important fact has been roundly ignored by the mainstream media in favor of making rich people residing in wealthy suburbs and who will never have to deal with real hardship feel good about themselves while ordinary working-class locals in their tiny villages and neglected neighborhoods are forced to bear the burden of processing and tending to a seemingly endless flood of migrants and refugees at their own expense. Is it any wonder people are fed up that the elites are so out-of-touch? Is it any wonder Brexit happened?

As someone on this thread wrote, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. A supposedly "progressive" and "compassionate" open-borders policy has turned out to be no less deadly, heartless and racist than simply shutting down borders and turning migrants away when said migrants risk their lives believing a better life awaits them in Europe and America because bleeding-heart leftists have given them that false impression. The difference is that the "progressive" Left lies, obfuscates, manipulates, gaslights, and projects their own racism onto their political opponents because it's the "woke" thing to do. Leftists need to look at themselves in the mirror before they accuse others of perpetuating "white supremacy" and "systemic racism". By their own standards, the Left is systemically racist and unjust.

[Solvokina]

How about we kick turkey out? They commit mass genocide in Syria ironically. Also, those are illegals, to say its genocide is an overstatement. I swear the number of people supporting turkey is actually fucked and are blinded through their crimes

Kick Turkey out of what exactly?

NATO as well as anything like sanctioning them

[Gravlen]

More like the Geneva Suggestions.

Really it is, the refugee convention has no method of ensuring compliance, there's no means of punishment and no oversight committee that can enforce the rule.

Basically the only punishment that has been used against those violating it is public shaming and strong condemnations.

Furthermore these migrants are actually violating the convention as well, according to the very writing of the refugee convention all refugees must abide by the national laws of the contracting states.

By illegally immigrating to the country the migrants are in violation of the convention themselves.

That is not true.

The Convention has taken illegal entry into consideration, and deals with that question in Article 31:

1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.

Illegal entry is clearly not in violation of the Convention when the Convention includes mechanisms for dealing with it.

(By the way, I added a link in the quote, to preempt a commonly stated objection)

[Gravlen]

Eh, Greece's fault for joining the Bureaupean Union.

This one, I like. That's a good one!

[Salandriagado]

Driving them to Turkey is one thing dumping them at sea and hoping the Turkish coast guard saves them is another.

Greece has a responsibility to not dump them off in the ocean.

Do they have a responsibility to them at all?

You don't need a responsibility for someone for throwing them in the ocean to be murder.

[Salandriagado]

How about we kick turkey out? They commit mass genocide in Syria ironically. Also, those are illegals, to say its genocide is an overstatement. I swear the number of people supporting turkey is actually fucked and are blinded through their crimes

Rather hard to kick them out of something they aren't in.

[-Astoria-]

Gonna admit, withdrawing from one of the Geneva Conventions would definitely violate the Copenhagen Criteria.

More like the Geneva Suggestions.

How based.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

How about we kick turkey out? They commit mass genocide in Syria ironically. Also, those are illegals, to say its genocide is an overstatement. I swear the number of people supporting turkey is actually fucked and are blinded through their crimes

Who here supports turkey besides actual turks?

[Borderlands of Rojava]

How about we kick turkey out? They commit mass genocide in Syria ironically. Also, those are illegals, to say its genocide is an overstatement. I swear the number of people supporting turkey is actually fucked and are blinded through their crimes

Kick Turkey out of what exactly?

NATO I guess.

[Loben III]

Kick Turkey out of what exactly?

NATO I guess.

Meh, bye to the Mediterranean being NATOs lake then.

[Solvokina]

How about we kick turkey out? They commit mass genocide in Syria ironically. Also, those are illegals, to say its genocide is an overstatement. I swear the number of people supporting turkey is actually fucked and are blinded through their crimes

Who here supports turkey besides actual turks?

I have no bloody idea

[Greed and Death]

NATO I guess.

Meh, bye to the Mediterranean being NATOs lake then.

Russia would like that a lot.

[Aureumterra]

Kick Turkey out of what exactly?

NATO I guess.

Thats a terrible idea and is basically inviting Russia to pick Turkey up. Also you can’t "leave NATO," that’s literally impossible as NATO has no exit clause

[Borderlands of Rojava]

NATO I guess.

Thats a terrible idea and is basically inviting Russia to pick Turkey up. Also you can’t "leave NATO," that’s literally impossible as NATO has no exit clause

I never said its possible. Im guessing as to what he wants turkey to be kicked out of.

[Hirota]

Greece has no responsibility and turkey is close enough to travel too. Hardly abandonment.

Driving them to Turkey is one thing dumping them at sea and hoping the Turkish coast guard saves them is another.

Greece has a responsibility to not dump them off in the ocean.

You are aware that the EU nations (including Greece) actually pay nations such as Turkey to take responsibility for migrants flowing through their borders?

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

Involuntary unemployment is the situation of deficient aggregate demand, or more often, deficient current capital investment. Supply is irrelevant, because it is simply a function of demand.

Obviously, like you point out, there is frictional unemployment, but that doesn't factor into usual economic theory. Also, it's called frictional because by its very nature, it's always transient.

Also, it takes time for the market to adjust, which may result in oversupply.



People are not commodities to be bought or sold. The theory of employment is not part of the general theory of supply and demand. It is entirely separate.

Supply is not irrelevant, because supply determines the how much you need to increase demand.
For example if there are 100 people unemployed, a stimulus spending to give jobs to 10 people will be insufficient. Obviously the more people unemployed, the greater the stimulus will have to be.

The amount of additional investment capital needed will depend on the number who are unemployed, obviously.

People will not automatically increase capital investment to offset unemployment either. For various reasons.
And various structural constraints are not easily or automatically overcome.

Again if aggregate demand always increased to offset unemployment, all unemployment would only be short term.
Long term structural unemployment could not happen, but it does. The fact that job shortages and labor shortages can occur proves that it is not so simple and that supply and demand for labor is not always in equilibrium.

Structural and resource constraints are real issues that prevent AD from rising to meet a population increase.

Long term structural unemployment is because of incorrect government monetary policy. Unsurprisingly, governments mess up, so you get long term involuntary unemployment.

I suppose if you really wanted to shoehorn it in, you can look at employment using supply and demand, even if it is a useless heuristic in this case, because they don't actually interact with each other in any way.

[Conservative Republic Of Huang]

You should tell your boss that your job "only exists on paper" as an excuse to not go to work. Don't be so dismissive of the economic mechanisms which have created the miracle of modern life.

Also, although the immigrants have low purchasing power, they have to spend more of their income on necessaries, as opposed to richer people, who leave a larger proportion of their income hoarded away not stimulating the economy.

Having people constantly spend money and have no savings/investments is no way to run an economy in my view. That is just more of the mindset that caused runaway global climate change to begin with. Wasteful consumerism. There is no job that exists that I'd be hired for where I live. In any case, I'm not interested in banks, the captains of industry, and other elitists getting richer at the expense of everyone else more so than needs to be the case. I'm not going to favor more immigration just so their labor costs can become lower.

If constant growth is really so important, why is every boom almost inevitably followed by a recession or castastrophic bust and the government pathetically tries to artificially blunt or micromanage? It is almost as if there are things more important than the economic numbers and that no one really knows how wealth should truly be used for the most return across the board, in terms of benefits to be enjoyed or allocated.

I hope you realize what I'm espousing is Keynesian economics. Under its framework, more equitable wealth distribution is considered a stimulant to the economy.

Also, try seeing what happens if everyone saves all their money. I'll tell you what: the economy collapses. From a purely economic perspective, spending is good. It's the paradox of thrift.

Booms and busts are aberrations that can be caused for a whole host of reasons, but the basic ideas of Keynes generally hold true. Besides, Keynesian macroeconomics is a short term theory.

I really really hate it when "populists" like you so quickly dismiss economics. Might help if you learned something about it rather than pretending all economics are bunk because there are booms and busts (which are also part of economic theory).

[Kowani]

Having people constantly spend money and have no savings/investments is no way to run an economy in my view. That is just more of the mindset that caused runaway global climate change to begin with. Wasteful consumerism. There is no job that exists that I'd be hired for where I live. In any case, I'm not interested in banks, the captains of industry, and other elitists getting richer at the expense of everyone else more so than needs to be the case. I'm not going to favor more immigration just so their labor costs can become lower.

If constant growth is really so important, why is every boom almost inevitably followed by a recession or castastrophic bust and the government pathetically tries to artificially blunt or micromanage? It is almost as if there are things more important than the economic numbers and that no one really knows how wealth should truly be used for the most return across the board, in terms of benefits to be enjoyed or allocated.

I hope you realize what I'm espousing is Keynesian economics. Under its framework, more equitable wealth distribution is considered a stimulant to the economy.

Also, try seeing what happens if everyone saves all their money. I'll tell you what: the economy collapses. From a purely economic perspective, spending is good. It's the paradox of thrift.

Booms and busts are aberrations that can be caused for a whole host of reasons, but the basic ideas of Keynes generally hold true. Besides, Keynesian macroeconomics is a short term theory.

I really really hate it when "populists" like you so quickly dismiss economics. Might help if you learned something about it rather than pretending all economics are bunk because there are booms and busts (which are also part of economic theory).

You are my new favorite person on this site.

[Atheris]

Kick Turkey out of what exactly?

NATO as well as anything like sanctioning them

So that Russia can pick them up and make them their new best friend? No thanks.

[Eurocorp2092]

youre not entitled to be allowed to live in another country just because you traveled there.

But they shouldnt be forced to be in the sea alone, there should be some legal procces to take care of them.