Are Democrats right-wing?

[Former President tack50]

I was referring to economics, yes, but what you said has no empirical support.

And you know, the immigrants...

There have been lots of studies on the issue of immigration, the workforce and economics.

However the main conclusions seem to be that while immigration is a slight positive for the economy (and obviously for the immigrants themselves) it is a negative for the "native working class", whose jobs get taken over by immigrants earning less in many cases.

The (native) rich and priviledged, and even the upper middle class profit from immigration, but the (native) working class does not.

"Lump of Labour" might be a phallacy but there is some truth to the usual "immigrants taking our jobs!" line

I would also add that in my view, when unemployment is low if you artificially reduce the supply of labor by restricting immigration you will end up forcing companies to pay more for their employees, increasing wages and taking people out of poverty. Now, there are limits to this (Labor shortages can be a real thing) but the general principle is true.

Similarly, when unemployment is high, if immigrants take the jobs of those who are unemployed, it is harder to reduce unemployment. Similar principle to above applies.

TL;DR: Immigration is bad for the (native) working class, even when it is beneficial for the economy at-large

[Former President tack50]

Mind showing these studies?

Here is a random example (granted centred on the UK but it should work and it's also the best formatted for people not used to read papers and studies)

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-labour-market-effects-of-immigration/

The study does find that there is little impact overall, but that whatever impact exists is disproportionally concentrated among natives that were already worst off, having the lower levels of education, income and employment; with the lower classes being more likely to lose than win out from immigration.

There is also this article, as well as other studies on the matter: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216/

Note, I am not saying immigration is negative for the economy at large; immigration is certainly a positive for the economy. The thesis I am stating is that the native working class is at best just as poor as it used to be, and at worst actually even worse off from immigration; with most of the benefits being concentrated on the upper and upper middle class.

[Former President tack50]

What makes a native-born American more deserving of a job than an immigrant?

I mean, if you believe open borders are a good policy, nothing, but at that point you may as well dissolve the US government, switch to a yellow avatar and become an anarcho-capitalist

Now seriously, I do think that employment should go mostly to native born citizens first; though ironically I would also be in favour of a system like Canada, which pretty much ensures the "best and brightest" are the ones to get into the country; prizing skilled immigration over unskilled one.

I can admit that restricting immigration is basically a protectionist policy, where it is negative for the economy overall, but positive for certain subsectors of it; subsectors taht can sometimes be strategic enough to deserve the special protection.

I am also not going to deny that immigration is unambiguously positive for the immigrants themselves. People do not move countries without a good reason to do so. However, reducing global poverty by increasing immigration is just a grain of sand in a huge desert; it doesn't do much in the grand scheme of things.

There is definitely a huge middle ground to be found between an "America First" super restrictive policy and literal open borders