If we take a step back and don’t see being pro migration as a political affiliation, and instead look at the economics of it, limiting it is not that unresonable. Mothers in Switzerland get a very limited maternity leave, and fathers get none. Childcare is insanely expensive. Buying property is out of the reach of most Swiss workers. But if you have unlimited young migrants willing to come here and do whatever job needs to be done, with no pressure to increase wages or improve conditions, then of course the birth rate is low and people can’t afford anything. However, if you were stuck with the local population, and you had to find solutions to get them to do the jobs you need done at the numbers needed, then incentives to work and make children will be created. Otherwise your business will go bankrupt, or more generally your society wouldn’t work. Of course there should be exceptions to the rule, but just a few. And I know the EU wouldn’t approve of it. But if anyone is interested in having this debate without relying on logical fallacies or black and white reasoning I’d be very happy to. Disclaimer: I have a masters in Economics from the UZH, and I don’t think it’s a serious social science. The methods are solid, but the academic culture is highly rigid and implicitly dishonest. The metrics used to qualify a policy as good or bad are often cherry picked and p-hacked to support whatever narrative gets you citations and funding. Therefore let’s please keep the discussion simple, direct and based on reasoning from first principles. Thank you! submitted by /u/Aywing
Originally posted by u/Aywing on r/Switzerland