The supposed list of benefits of Sarracinization doesn't contain a single piece of data
If the Sarracinization of the West were the great deal some people claim, you would expect to find figures: how much birth rates would rise, how much spending on fashion would fall, or how much halal butcher shops would earn. There is none of that. The economic version of the list boils down to fifteen points mixing gender roles, textile consumption and food, without a single percentage, salary or revenue projection.
Cultural criticism dressed up as economic analysis
The list circulating online says nothing about productivity, employment or taxes. It talks about the "natural social role", "decency" or "covered-up women", and wraps it all in supposed benefits such as halal food or linen clothing. These are identity-based opinions, legitimate as such, but not economics. The pushback was quick: the closest thing to a market forecast has been the rise in flip-flop sales. A sarcasm that says more than any chart.
Where's the evidence?
On birth rates, hypergamy or the influence of religion on consumption, there is serious academic research. This list cites none of it. It presents no demographic series or integration costs either. It stops at assertion and, at best, the quip. The public conversation about immigration and cultural change deserves data, not a wish list.
If the supposed economic benefits of Sarracinization were real, someone would have done the math. Nobody has shown them yet. Why?
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication.
Read the full discussion (49 replies).
State investment is growing six times faster than private investment and 19.3 million citizens live on benefits: the IMF's endorsement of Sánchez's economic model in Spain.
De Niro, Nicholson, Bacon and other actors with a smug face have been the perfect capitalist villains of cinema. An analysis of the business behind the face.