BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 62,679
- 11,019
- 136
Your post is not particularly convincing. 90%+ of the rest of the world is also mostly socialist or quasi-socialist styles of economies.
You could move here and send your kids to public schools for a very long time. Certainly in the 20th century.
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.
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?
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...
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.
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.