feeling more ‘cultural’ concerns [are] going ignored
Mass low-skilled immigration directly decreases GDP per capita - I think in the comments we established that this is an edgelord claim. We overturned the evidence that mass immigration was decreasing GDP per capita. The the low-skilled third of immigration is reducing GDP per capita, but I think it's easy to misread your statement as "mass immigration (much of it low skilled) is directly decreasing GDP per capita".
relateto is feeling vulnerable and would like you to give it some space.
Statutory duties on local councils do make a nonesense of local democracy, and repealing them would enable better accountability and more sensible choices. (But as usual, the problem isn't coming up with good policies. The problem is finding a way to make them popular.)
I'm very comfortable with the phrasing that mass low-skilled immigration decreases GDP per capita.
In Part 1 I set out that fewer than a quarter of those arriving are doing so on work visas. Of that number, only about 2/3 (so c 1/6 of total immigration) are making a net fiscal contribution - and that calculation only holds if we exclude the impact of any dependents they might bring with them.
Okay, in fairness the first graph that we found failed entirely was looking at total GDP, so it's probably more accurate to say that we overturned the evidence that mass immigration is suppressing total GDP growth, and then hated on OBR choices on the GDP per capita data (but given the dependents the overall effect must be negative as you say).
There are many ways to regulate. I am aestheticly opposed to "apply for permission, the bureaucracy will get back to you"-type systems.
Here are some other methods to try:
Do you have object-level rules with punishments for breaking them?
Do you have mechanisms where victims get paid damages?
Does the government mediate contract disputes?
Does the government mandate liability insurance?
Does the government have a credentialing system where credentialed people are given licence to use their judgement?
Does the government have a bond system where people who have paid in are given licence to use their judgement?
Does the government give activists objecting to a project the right to be heard?
Does the government give activists objecting to a project the power to obstruct it?
Does the government use taxation or subsidisation as a form of regulation?
Does the government let you avoid procurement process by buying at the London Metals Exchange?
Does the government require detailed reporting of actions taken?
Does the government require external audits?
Does the government have a whistleblowing scheme?
Does the government have a bounty scheme where snitches get riches?
Does the government require annual skills and knowledge training?
Other:
Does the government make you sign an "I am stupid" certificate before taking a certain class of actions?
These methods are not built the same: some preserve liberty, others don't; some are more effective than others; some impose greater compliance costs than others. I would be interested in a NICE for Regulation: what combinations of regulation are most cost effective?
Not de-regululation, but re-regulation: hone in on regulation that works.
feeling more ‘cultural’ concerns [are] going ignored
Mass low-skilled immigration directly decreases GDP per capita - I think in the comments we established that this is an edgelord claim. We overturned the evidence that mass immigration was decreasing GDP per capita. The the low-skilled third of immigration is reducing GDP per capita, but I think it's easy to misread your statement as "mass immigration (much of it low skilled) is directly decreasing GDP per capita".
relateto is feeling vulnerable and would like you to give it some space.
Statutory duties on local councils do make a nonesense of local democracy, and repealing them would enable better accountability and more sensible choices. (But as usual, the problem isn't coming up with good policies. The problem is finding a way to make them popular.)
I'm very comfortable with the phrasing that mass low-skilled immigration decreases GDP per capita.
In Part 1 I set out that fewer than a quarter of those arriving are doing so on work visas. Of that number, only about 2/3 (so c 1/6 of total immigration) are making a net fiscal contribution - and that calculation only holds if we exclude the impact of any dependents they might bring with them.
Okay, in fairness the first graph that we found failed entirely was looking at total GDP, so it's probably more accurate to say that we overturned the evidence that mass immigration is suppressing total GDP growth, and then hated on OBR choices on the GDP per capita data (but given the dependents the overall effect must be negative as you say).
There are many ways to regulate. I am aestheticly opposed to "apply for permission, the bureaucracy will get back to you"-type systems.
Here are some other methods to try:
Do you have object-level rules with punishments for breaking them?
Do you have mechanisms where victims get paid damages?
Does the government mediate contract disputes?
Does the government mandate liability insurance?
Does the government have a credentialing system where credentialed people are given licence to use their judgement?
Does the government have a bond system where people who have paid in are given licence to use their judgement?
Does the government give activists objecting to a project the right to be heard?
Does the government give activists objecting to a project the power to obstruct it?
Does the government use taxation or subsidisation as a form of regulation?
Does the government let you avoid procurement process by buying at the London Metals Exchange?
Does the government require detailed reporting of actions taken?
Does the government require external audits?
Does the government have a whistleblowing scheme?
Does the government have a bounty scheme where snitches get riches?
Does the government require annual skills and knowledge training?
Other:
Does the government make you sign an "I am stupid" certificate before taking a certain class of actions?
These methods are not built the same: some preserve liberty, others don't; some are more effective than others; some impose greater compliance costs than others. I would be interested in a NICE for Regulation: what combinations of regulation are most cost effective?
Not de-regululation, but re-regulation: hone in on regulation that works.