Irony and serious economics

Submitted by Jon a Brit in Euroland (France), May 26, 2016 at 12:57

Reading the Guardian's view of economics (particularly when edited by the "Migration Correspondent") is a theoretical challenge. I think that the analysis is incorrect, in that integrations costs rise geometrically (if not exponentially) with the size of the family units, as each additional person creates new incentives to rely more heavily on state support over the long term, and reduces, ipso facto, incentives to integrate.

The best (economic) solution would be through an increased fertility of "old german" females... since their mothers would be a huge positive factor in integration (and therefore future tax revenues)..

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".