Thread

1. roenxi · 1790756315 · focus · HN ↗

   > Every generation believes it is living through the end of something.

   Many generations are. Last century saw the collapse of the British and Soviet empires - titans by any measure - through mismanagement. Europe as an international power was also broken (compared to how they used to be). I can easily imagine 1900s me fleeing to America in fear of the end times and feeling quite justified in his choices with hindsight. Less obvious where to run to these days as the US not-an-empire looks like it may crumble.

   Most of the people who died didn't get an opportunity to complain, so we live with some serious survivorship bias on how bad things got.

   1. Maxion · 1790756968 · focus · HN ↗

      > Less obvious where to run to these days as the US not-an-empire looks like it may crumble.

      Depending on what you're running for China is in some senses kinda what the US was back in the day, except there's no land so no easy way for them to accept migrants. These day and age migrants also aren't very accepted anywhere.

      1. realharo · 1790757569 · focus · HN ↗

         China is facing many of the same problems that the rest of the world is, with demographic decline, slowing growth, etc.

         1. bsoqk · 1790757743 · focus · HN ↗

            Those problems could be solved with a careful migratory policy (ie what America did back in the day because it was economically impossible for the entire third world to fly there; today, this could be enforced with laws)

            1. somenameforme · 1790759300 · focus · HN ↗

               The issue with demographic decline is not just quantity of people, but also quality of people. China (and any country) will want individuals that speak the language, are culturally compatible, with useful skills, and so on. The limited number of people any country can draw on once you consider this starts to make it clear that migration doesn't solve anything.

               And even with migration, if those migrants don't themselves end up with high fertility rates then you've done nothing but kick the can, and not especially far. Because of all of these issues, I think there's approximately a 100% chance that China will do the equal but opposite of the one-child-policy should their demographic issues fail to start reversing more naturally.

               1. teiferer · 1790760266 · focus · HN ↗

                  > The issue with demographic decline is not just quantity of people, but also quality of people

                  "Quality of people". Spoken like a true tech person.

                  1. inglor_cz · 1790769171 · focus · HN ↗

                     Spoken like someone who does not want to play useless word games.

                     Would you choose an employee, or worse, a spouse, with no positive qualities? If no, you are judging people by their qualities too.

                     1. tancop · 1790780089 · focus · HN ↗

                        Saying quality is different than qualities plural. It's the kind of language used by rationalist[1] or HBD/eugenics adjacent movements that believe each person's value to society can be reduced to a single number. Too close to fascism for comfort.

                        That's obviously not the case in this context but it can get confusing so you should just avoid it. There are legit reasons to be suspicious of anyone talking like that. It's better to say "expected economic value" or "readiness to integrate" when talking about immigrants so you don't get mistaken for a racist.

                        [1] Used here as a slur.

                        1. inglor_cz · 1790790523 · focus · HN ↗

                           No one in this discussion except you expressed the idea that quality of a human can be expressed by a single number.

                           A more natural concept of overall human quality would be something like a linear combination of individual qualities in a multidimensional space.

                           a. Smart person - good, positive coefficient.

                           b. Diligent person - good, positive coefficient.

                           c. But works for the mob as a money launderer - bad, very high negative coefficient, probably high enough to drag the overall combination under the neutral hyperplane, so to say.

                           Etc. etc.

                           1. teiferer · 1790798605 · focus · HN ↗

                              Sure, but it doesn't work like that in public discourse and it's hard to believe that you are oblivious to that.

                              That 19 year old dark skinned refugee from Syria who has just arrived in Poland in 2015, doesn't speak the language, is physically fit, basic school education, quite some trauma to process though. That's what the far right racist nationlists there would have called a low quality human. Don't use their language if you don't want to be associated with their views.

                              And indeed, if their trauma is not processed and they are left in a ghetto with other traumatized folks, that's a recipe for violence to eventually erupt. But if they get help by a psychologiest and a chance to integrate, they can contribute to society immensely, build a life, become the best neighbors you could wish for.

                              Now, what is the "quality" of such a person? Or maybe rather: What is the quality of how we treat them.

                              1. inglor_cz · 1790799453 · focus · HN ↗

                                 Regular economic immigration processes, which is what is mainly being discussed here, are usually centered around measurable skills and other traits such as criminal record.

                                 BTW you don't know many Syrians if you consider them dark skinned. They are classical Mediterranean people, the whitest of all Arabic-speaking nations. You won't be able to tell a random Syrian from a random Greek.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.