Do you think illegal immigrants pay for themselves?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Do you think illegal immigrants are a net benefit to the economy?

  • Yes

  • No

  • I don't know / Neither


Results are only viewable after voting.

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
Your post is not particularly convincing. 90%+ of the rest of the world is also mostly socialist or quasi-socialist styles of economies.

My post was not to convince you or anyone but stated a fact.

So far, no one was able (here or other forums) to tell me one, just one, country on Earth that would let ILLEGALS in and then made them LEGALS.
 

Elias824

Golden Member
Mar 13, 2007
1,100
0
76
We already have huge amounts of largely un-skilled labor to pull from more isn't going to help us it just ends up screwing the lower class more. The one benefit it does bring is that its more people paying into SS smoothing out that population bubble.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
You could move here and send your kids to public schools for a very long time. Certainly in the 20th century.

I don't think you realize how much government, taxation, and education has changed. The European waves of immigration stopped in 1930. That was the very beginning of the New Deal. Before that government simply didn't provide the expenses services and take in the amount of taxes that it does today. Your trying to act like immigration in the 19th and early 20th century has the same dynamic as immigration in the 21st century is naive. As with everything else in history, much has changed. If you want to return to 19th century style education than maybe yeah $1000 a year in taxes will cover educating three children...
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Nonetheless, there is evidence that suggests that undocumented workers pay more into government then they utilize in services when you account for sales tax and SS/Medicare.

I don't think you're really paying attention to what's already been saying in this thread. And you saying there is evidence does not actually constitute evidence. I already linked to sources showing that the average illegal only generate $1000 in tax revenues per year. That isn't even 1/7th of what is needed by the state to pay for one child's education.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
The whole US immigration situation looks like a gigantic WTF to my Scandinavian sensibilities. Many millions of illegal immigrants right under the government's eyes in the US? We might have a couple of thousands, but AFAIK everyone who shows on the radar at all is either granted some kind of legal status or turned away. I don't really see why an immigration system should be ran any other way - either you want someone in your country, or not. Also, why not *really* secure your border, and get a major amnesty/crackdown program going where the existing illegals can either take a reasonable path to legal status or will get kicked out?

It comes down to the fact that the Democrats feel sorry for illegals and the Republicans like cheap labor for businesses. So even though the majority of Americans do not support illegals, the government essentially looks the other way. Another barrier is that only the federal government is allowed to regulate immigration. So the federal government allows illegals to move to California and Texas, and it's up to California and Texas to pay for the illegals' education, etc.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,785
6,187
126
I don't think you realize how much government, taxation, and education has changed. The European waves of immigration stopped in 1930. That was the very beginning of the New Deal. Before that government simply didn't provide the expenses services and take in the amount of taxes that it does today. Your trying to act like immigration in the 19th and early 20th century has the same dynamic as immigration in the 21st century is naive. As with everything else in history, much has changed. If you want to return to 19th century style education than maybe yeah $1000 a year in taxes will cover educating three children...

It's the same dynamic, we need cheap labor, people come here and fulfill the need. They send their kids to school, if they have kids to send to school. If anything a lot more illegals are coming here without kids and sending money back home. Back in those days they would bring the whole family home.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Production HAS to be at least equal to consumption, else the difference must be made up with borrowing. No one can consume a good or service not produced. We were a net wealth producing nation until the fifties, which is why our standard of living so greatly increased. Create more wealth, you can consume more wealth. Consume more wealth without producing equally more, you merely drive up the price as a non-increasing supply meets an increasing demand. If you import more goods and services to meet the increased demand without producing more wealth to pay for it, you must borrow to procure the balance. We've been doing that as a culture for the last five or six decades, with the result that our debt is now so high that our credit rating WILL be reduced, not matter how this current kerfuffle is settled, unless we can significantly decrease our debt. Or at the least, our debt as related to GDP.

If demand and consumption were the most important thing in an economy, North Korea and Vietnam would be the two most prosperous nations per capita in the world, as they have the most control of any nations over demand and consumption - with near-total control of production to boot.

I'm sorry but I'm still not sure why the excess product inventory of businesses should be brought up in a discussion about the undeniable fact that products won't be consumed unless they are in demand and that illegals play an absolutely vital role in this regard because their consumption is among the many millions of Americans that drive the growth in this country. When you say we were a net wealth producing nation until the 50's I'm not sure what you mean and I'm pretty sure you don't either. If you mean to say we used to be a creditor nation that's certainly true, and all it shows is that we weren't using the debt financing resources at our disposal as much as we should have been. Over the last 30 or so years we've leveraged debt financing too much now, but of course that has nothing to do with the reality we've been a 65%-70% consumption-based economy long before the 50's and that's a fact.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
It's the same dynamic, we need cheap labor, people come here and fulfill the need. They send their kids to school, if they have kids to send to school. If anything a lot more illegals are coming here without kids and sending money back home. Back in those days they would bring the whole family home.

You keep telling yourself that 2010 is the same as 1900 and I'll keep relying on the statistics and data.