Not sure what you mean by "Americans" here. Is it the 58% white ones? Our demographic reality and demographic future means that "Americans" means nothing except someone who lives and works within our borders.
I think the question should rather be: which demographic is okay with a $20 burrito? Which demographic is willing to endure economic hardship for the future of their children?
Young people of any race: yes and no.
Suburban whites: yes and yes.
Rural whites: no and maybe, depending on the disability payments.
Boomer whites: yes because I just sold my property in New Jersey, and no.
Middle-aged blacks: no and no.
Hispanic, Indian, and Chinese immigrants: no and yes.
We had staggering levels of immigration for 4 years and quite high immigration for a decade or more before that. We have globalized our supply chain to the max. Now tell me Scott, has it made life cheap? Is housing cheap? Are burritos cheap? (Is social security funded?) Did we get the benefits that flooding our society with immigrants was supposed yo deliver? Or are the wage suppression gurus also imagining a bygone world, a brief moment in time where outsourcing labor suddenly flattened costs, but now that effect has worn off and oftentimes prices are, predictably, what the market will bear?
"have" not has. Burritos are relatively cheap but housing is not. Most consumer goods are still cheap but what's not is housing and healthcare. The article addresses the rest of your questions. We'd have more expensive goods with restriction and trade protection. People have been happy to say they'd pay that price.
What I’m saying is that we might not have more expensive goods with immigration restriction and trade protection, especially not after a few years. My car was built in Indiana, but it cost about the same as the other car I was considering at the time, a Maverick, which is built in Mexico. I recently purchased a sofa made in America for 30% less than another model I was considering that was made in Vietnam. Want a new Iphone—should be cheap right, since it’s made by Chinese serfs. Nope. Where are all these huge savings I was supposed to get? The trade off you’re claiming just isn’t there for anything besides, idk, pool toys and Halloween decorations
You edited this post but still left in typos. It would be "costs" not "cost." Contrary to what liberals believe, you don't have to be a white nationalist to not want massive demographic change. Your first question seems to undermine your other ones. I'd focus more on figuring out what you're trying to say rather than rushing to try to own me with stupid questions in the comments
Which Americans is he speaking about? I’d gladly live out my days in a single wide eating tuna from a can if it meant my line would be free of today’s tyranny and ethnic cleansing. Freaking out about $20 burritos isn’t in a vacuum — we’re also being discriminated against and having our progeny’s birthright stolen. The combination means something. It’s not about convenience, it’s about watching, feeling our standard of living decline in realtime as the stage is set for the blue tyrants to once again take the helm. Spoiler: vote harder will be the refrain. In the meantime “get used to it chuds, you demand too much and bootstrap” articles telling us to enjoy the slow boil. The issue is the lack of will to change because GDP line must go up.
There's line literally in the article saying the average person reading this piece would say "yes" to the question, but that would not be the average American. Thank you for not reading past the headline.
Not sure what you mean by "Americans" here. Is it the 58% white ones? Our demographic reality and demographic future means that "Americans" means nothing except someone who lives and works within our borders.
I think the question should rather be: which demographic is okay with a $20 burrito? Which demographic is willing to endure economic hardship for the future of their children?
Young people of any race: yes and no.
Suburban whites: yes and yes.
Rural whites: no and maybe, depending on the disability payments.
Boomer whites: yes because I just sold my property in New Jersey, and no.
Middle-aged blacks: no and no.
Hispanic, Indian, and Chinese immigrants: no and yes.
We had staggering levels of immigration for 4 years and quite high immigration for a decade or more before that. We have globalized our supply chain to the max. Now tell me Scott, has it made life cheap? Is housing cheap? Are burritos cheap? (Is social security funded?) Did we get the benefits that flooding our society with immigrants was supposed yo deliver? Or are the wage suppression gurus also imagining a bygone world, a brief moment in time where outsourcing labor suddenly flattened costs, but now that effect has worn off and oftentimes prices are, predictably, what the market will bear?
"have" not has. Burritos are relatively cheap but housing is not. Most consumer goods are still cheap but what's not is housing and healthcare. The article addresses the rest of your questions. We'd have more expensive goods with restriction and trade protection. People have been happy to say they'd pay that price.
What I’m saying is that we might not have more expensive goods with immigration restriction and trade protection, especially not after a few years. My car was built in Indiana, but it cost about the same as the other car I was considering at the time, a Maverick, which is built in Mexico. I recently purchased a sofa made in America for 30% less than another model I was considering that was made in Vietnam. Want a new Iphone—should be cheap right, since it’s made by Chinese serfs. Nope. Where are all these huge savings I was supposed to get? The trade off you’re claiming just isn’t there for anything besides, idk, pool toys and Halloween decorations
What is the point of higher wages if life cost more ?
Also if your not a White nationalist why does immigration matter ?
You say an America that looks like America what does that even mean ?
You edited this post but still left in typos. It would be "costs" not "cost." Contrary to what liberals believe, you don't have to be a white nationalist to not want massive demographic change. Your first question seems to undermine your other ones. I'd focus more on figuring out what you're trying to say rather than rushing to try to own me with stupid questions in the comments
Which Americans is he speaking about? I’d gladly live out my days in a single wide eating tuna from a can if it meant my line would be free of today’s tyranny and ethnic cleansing. Freaking out about $20 burritos isn’t in a vacuum — we’re also being discriminated against and having our progeny’s birthright stolen. The combination means something. It’s not about convenience, it’s about watching, feeling our standard of living decline in realtime as the stage is set for the blue tyrants to once again take the helm. Spoiler: vote harder will be the refrain. In the meantime “get used to it chuds, you demand too much and bootstrap” articles telling us to enjoy the slow boil. The issue is the lack of will to change because GDP line must go up.
There's line literally in the article saying the average person reading this piece would say "yes" to the question, but that would not be the average American. Thank you for not reading past the headline.