Why would any Plutocratic nation cut off its preverbal "growth" nose to immigration to spoil its consumerism?

Question

When "successful" industrialized nations require new cheap labor immigrants to maintain all global-growth without unions, and environmental limits what nation isn't motivated to work the overpopulated masses as indentured servants, or slaves in cheap labor wages to insure that free trade works for democracies, or Plutodemocracies it doesn't matter for Capitolist or Socialist who run them as plutocrats?

Answer 1

Well most money earnd by recent immigrants is heading back south...look up the numbers. Secondly the cost in social services outweighs their consumerism.

Answer 2

Why do you use so much jargon?

Only the employers benefit. We taxpayers fund the overcrowded and underfunded schools where our children can no longer get a good education.

That decreases upward mobility for our own children.

Which may ultimately also benefit the corporate employers who would have even more uneducated masses to exploit.

However, those who do not want to see their children become part of the uneducated masses are against it.

Answer 3

There's more to life than 'growth', and this has gotten past the point of stupid, in my view. All our 'growth' has done is permanently destablize Mexico, and it's destabilizing our own country, too. Out-of-control growth is also known as 'cancer', and cancer eventually consumes the entire patient...