Thankyou. That really needed saying.

From the Democrats in the United States to the centre-left parties throughout the West, the enthusiasm for unrestricted immigration can only be explained rationally by the deep loathing of some parts of their own societies and the desire to irrevocably tip the electoral scales in their favour. It has nothing to do with national interest or sensible economic and social arguments; it’s about political power to transform the society to your desired vision.

A few things.

An ivy league study over thirty years of a number of economists found as their notoriety increased their accuracy went down in inverse proportion.

Put ten economists in the same room and you'll get thirty different opinions.

Economics is not an exact science! Why a dart-throwing monkey is right more often!

Moreover, an expert is defined as, an X is an unknown quantity and a spurt is merely a drip under pressure.

Levity aside there was a time after much (Great Depression) trial and error when one branch of economic management made some sense and left us as the third wealthiest nation on the planet and a creditor one at that.

And an affront to extreme capitalists the world over who have mounted a decades-long campaign to dismantle everything (cooperative capitalism) the application of Keynesian economic theory created. And created the result we see today, pockets of often extreme wealthy surrounded by endemic, generational squalor

WE CAN DO SO MUCH BETTER, WE HAVE THE TRIED AND PROVEN FORMULA! TBC.
Alan B

I'm not sure that anthropologists (green activists) would do better or actually improve the lot of those currently living in squalor? In fact, I do believe their remedy, a return to an agrarian culture would just drive the final nail in humanities coffin. As evidenced in an agrarian culture (Ethiopia) after several years of enduring drought. And transformed a wooded northern mountainous region to a lunar landscape as the sparely settled resident village-style population sort to simply survive!

Green economists seem to think all they need do to solve endemic generational squalor is to virtually print money? As advocated by some of their leaders?

And we saw how they very nearly destroyed the German economy in just one electoral term when they ruled there as the leading party!

And a good reason to stop listening to their insane propositions!

Our once robust economy was based on and created by once-affordable power and could be again if we but used the brains we were born with.

And that affordable power needs to be carbon-free, reliable and dispatchable! And ideally, walk away safe!

Given that essential criteria, there is only one source of power that even comes close and that is nuclear power.

And that nuclear power is MSR thorium which has the advantage of being able to burn other folks nuclear waste and for annual billions, we'd be paid, for supplying the burial service, but only after we'd extracted a remarkable 95% or thereabout of still retained energy quotient and in perfect, walk away, safety!

The annual billions would pay for all the new MS reactors we'd need and MSR can be bought off the shelf and adapted to fluoride, which is superior to sodium in every way and far safer! If we don't want to follow the UK?

Then let's rebuild and resuscitate our industrial base with energy dependant manufacture, processing and value-adding and the highly paid permanent jobs that'd be created by that return to sanity!
Alan B

I think we probably already have more anthropologists in our parliaments than scientists (rational thinkers) and that would explain many of the current power struggle absurdities that seem to be front and centre as the only worthwhile goal of obtaining the people's power!

Some like Kevin Andrews have made a difference?

Notably, like the aforementioned to their negatively geared real estate portfolio, which at last count included around 123 negatively geared houses?

Mr Putin is now up there among the super-wealthy oil oligarchs.

Mr Trump seems to have not paid tax for yonks even though he owns billions and indeed t
left a trail of bankrupt family business and families in his wake as the six times bankrupt amassed a personal fortune?

Mr Netenanyhu's exploits are already well known as were those of the former Ukraine President?

One could go on and on, but that would require a lifetime and the complete removal of word limits!

But I believe the above examples makes my point for both me and the Author?
Alan B.

It's not fewer economist we need, it's better economists. And that means economists who don't rely on false assumptions. The false assumption that the people would move to where the jobs are is a good example of the kind of thinking to avoid. Jobs must be created where the people are!

But a complicating factor is that many of the false assumptions of the economists are regarded as "common sense" by the general population. People just can't get their heads around the fact that the government has unlimited credit and will never have to eliminate its debt, so they favour a policy of surpluses even when it harms economic growth.

I quite like this anthropological assessment of the state of the humanly created world in 2020
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/12/30/the-external-costs-of-human-activity-are-killing-the-planet

A situation that very few (if indeed any_ of those on the so called conservative side of the culture wars seem to even begin to acknowledge or take into account. Indeed they all wish to turbo-charge the situation described in this essay.