Immigration Overeaction and Misperceptions

[Stunt]

First off, I want people to understand this is not a Republican/Democrat issue. There are politicans on both sides with differing opinions and should be treated as non-partisan.

The Ideology: The Socialists tend to be pro-protectionism through trade barriers and the like. The number one advocate of illegal immigrants are corporations who have been getting cheap labour for years. The deportation of illegals is by far the most liberal stance of all the options at the moment. (however this position is being represented by many so called 'conservatives')

The Numbers: People seem to have this perception that illegal immigration is accelerating at an amazing rate and must be stopped. In actual fact the following numbers taken from the economist indicate the number of illegals entering the United States is declining. This wedge issue is being blown out of proportion by the political parties, special interest groups and the media.

US Immigrants:
1980's: 0.65m legal, 0.15m illegal
1990-1994: 0.66m legal, 0.49m illegal
1995-2000: 0.65m legal, 0.75m illegal
2000-2004: 0.60m legal, 0.70m illegal

The Reasoning:The notion of illegals being a 'drian on society' is completely incorrect and people need to understand that illegals are not ruining the country but in fact helping it progress. If Europe has taught us anything, minimum wage, low population growth, and socialist protectionism leads to economic stagnation.

To understand how illegals are actually benefiting the US economy, one can turn to macroeconomics; unemployment is proportional to minimum wage. Even though the US itself has a minimum wage, illegals fill the otherwise impossible scenario of having no minimum wage.

Another aspect to consider is the American population; predictions these days estimate the population will be over 450m by 2050, most of that growth coming from immigration and the higher birth rate of illegals and other immigrants (tend to have larger birth rates). The sheer amount of growth needed to bring all these people to the standard of living inherent in the American Society itself will create much more growth than anyone can imagine.

One concern people have is the taxation issue, I consider this a moot point considering the red southern states have reduced the income tax component (Texas is income tax free) and the next generation of Mexican-Americans are registering to have access to the same services and opportunities as every other American citizen. Meanwhile these people are spending money just like every other consumer in the US; generating sales tax on all the objects and services bought.

Economically, illegals and immigrants will be the one key driving force in maintaining the US status as a superpower and not one person in this world is less deserving of a first world lifestyle, whether that be in the US, Canada or elsewhere. (The Pragmatic Reformist)

That's my take...Discuss.

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: Stunt
The sheer amount of growth needed to bring all these people to the standard of living inherent in the American Society itself will create much more growth than anyone can imagine.

Not if they drag down the rest of the US to their standard of living. Unless you're handing them huge entitlements, youre not going to get a strawberry picker to live in a 1500 sqft house with 2 cars or whatever.

And income tax is a much larger percentage of a person's tax burden than sales tax, how do illegals pay income tax when they're working under the table?

And I doubt they're really buying large amoutns of high end goods that have sales tax, maybe some clothes here and there.




I havent really made up my mind yet about where I stand on this issue, just sending out some counter points.

 

[Jaskalas]

A mistake you make is to assume that our standard of living is untouchable, and unmoved by the large population boom of illegals who are in poverty.

During the second half of the 1900?s inflation has consumed wages, where once any average job our grandfathers could hold would pay the bills comfortably, today I see families with both parents working struggling to survive and are still sinking into deeper poverty every year due to the cost of living increases.

The poverty the immigrants from Mexico bring hurts us two fold. One, they require additional medical care and education. Per person for 11+ million people this adds up to costing billions as quoted by our own states over their growing deficits.

Second, HOW can you possibly tell me that they?ll pay taxes while living in poverty? Our system is setup to take advantage of the rich while helping the poor. I don?t see where people who have minimum wage or less are going to contribute to this. Correct me if my concept of the system is wrong.

Then there?s the question of what these tens of millions of new voters are going to do. Might this be any clue?

http://www.unm.edu/~ecdn/map2080ad.htm

Feel free to browse the rest of that site, it's fairly informational on that group's intentions.

 

[daniel49]

The sheer amount of growth needed to bring all these people to the standard of living inherent in the American Society itself will create much more growth than anyone can imagine.

Or to large entitlement programs as they are earning wages below the poverty level.

 

[Moonbeam]

We have 12 million criminals running free. Why can't I rob a bank or not pay my taxes. Screw the law and everything it represents. The criminal always wins. And I plan to have 20 kids.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
A mistake you make is to assume that our standard of living is untouchable, and unmoved by the large population boom of illegals who are in poverty.

During the second half of the 1900?s inflation has consumed wages, where once any average job our grandfathers could hold would pay the bills comfortably, today I see families with both parents working struggling to survive and are still sinking into deeper poverty every year due to the cost of living increases.

The poverty the immigrants from Mexico bring hurts us two fold. One, they require additional medical care and education. Per person for 11+ million people this adds up to costing billions as quoted by our own states over their growing deficits.

Second, HOW can you possibly tell me that they?ll pay taxes while living in poverty? Our system is setup to take advantage of the rich while helping the poor. I don?t see where people who have minimum wage or less are going to contribute to this. Correct me if my concept of the system is wrong.

Then there?s the question of what these tens of millions of new voters are going to do. Might this be any clue?

http://www.unm.edu/~ecdn/map2080ad.htm

Feel free to browse the rest of that site, it's fairly informational on that group's intentions.

The "good old days" were not, in fact, noticably better in terms of earning power than the current economic situation. It is a myth that the average blue collar job of yesteryear allowed a greater standard of living than even TWO reasonably high paying white collar jobs today. The fact is that back in the good old days, the standard of living was simply LOWER. We do indeed spend more money, but it's not all going to cost of living increases. The number of vacations the average family takes, the number of cars they own, the size of their houses, and most of the rest of it has been going up for a long time. The reason people are more in debt than ever before is a matter of overreach than anything else, we have a problem today trying to live way beyond our means that didn't exist to this extent years ago. But aside from that, we're quite a bit better off than we were 50 years ago.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Stunt

The Ideology: The Socialists tend to be pro-protectionism through trade barriers and the like. The number one advocate of illegal immigrants are corporations who have been getting cheap labour for years. The deportation of illegals is by far the most liberal stance of all the options at the moment. (however this position is being represented by many so called 'conservatives')

I disagree that this is a socialism/capitalism type of issue. It's perfectly conceivable that you could have capitalism internally while at the same time maintaining trade and immigration barriers. It's funny how people claim that it's "capitalism" when businesses try to artificially increase the supply of labor and lower the price point (wages) by destroying national borders, but at the same time they claim that it's socialism when labor asks the government to artificially raise the price point (wages).

Can't we just get the government out of the economy and have an American free market where supply and demand sets the prices for goods, services, and labor, maintaining borders to prevent the economic ravages of socialism, communism, and overpopulation abroad from contaminating our market?

Mass immigration from impoverished nations that have socialism is NOT capitalism. Rather, it is the importation of poverty created by socialism, in effect, it is a contamination of the nation's capitalism with another government's socialism. Eliminating national borders and merging the economy with a socialist economy is not capitalism.

The Numbers: People seem to have this perception that illegal immigration is accelerating at an amazing rate and must be stopped. In actual fact the following numbers taken from the economist indicate the number of illegals entering the United States is declining. This wedge issue is being blown out of proportion by the political parties, special interest groups and the media.

I don't know the numbers, but I do know that the U.S. population exploded by 32.7 million people in the 10 years from 1990 to 2000, which was the largest population boom ever. Mass immigration and the children of immigrants were a large part of it.

The Reasoning:The notion of illegals being a 'drian on society' is completely incorrect and people need to understand that illegals are not ruining the country but in fact helping it progress. If Europe has taught us anything, minimum wage, low population growth, and socialist protectionism leads to economic stagnation.

To understand how illegals are actually benefiting the US economy, one can turn to macroeconomics; unemployment is proportional to minimum wage. Even though the US itself has a minimum wage, illegals fill the otherwise impossible scenario of having no minimum wage.

Unemployment is related to a great many factors, including the amounts of any minimum wages, whether or not the nation has a trade deficit and suffers from global labor wage arbitrage, whether or not illegal aliens are taking jobs, and the amount to which the government taxes and regulates people and businesses.

The funny thing about Europe is that I'm under the impression that, for the most part, the quality of life is relatively high, especially in the lower population countries where the cost of land would end up being relatively lower.

It's funny how many self-proclaimed advocates of capitalism seem to believe that it's possible to get something for nothing. They fail to realize that you cannot consume more than you produce and believe that masses of immigrants and huge trade deficits will magically change that.

Perhaps under real capitalism masses of impoverished immigrants might help support a pyramid where those above them can enjoy more wealth than they produce by taking some of the value of the wealth produced by the immigrants. (Of course--that ignores issues such as the environmental costs of having a larger population and any disproportionate criminal justice costs since poor people tend to commit more crimes.) However the U.S. does not have real capitalism and the nation provides services such as health care and education for children, which, in the U.S., regard as social values that we are willing to pay for. If the U.S. didn't already have a huge impoverished underclass of American citizens who should be doing these jobs, then perhaps it might make some sense to pay for the illegals, but since the U.S. does have a huge impoverished underclass, it doesn't make sense.

Is it cheaper to (1) pay for health care, education, environmental/resource costs, and criminal costs for 1 illegal and his family and 1 impoverished American and his family or (2) pay for healt care, education, and criminal costs for 1 impoverished American and his family?

Another aspect to consider is the American population; predictions these days estimate the population will be over 450m by 2050, most of that growth coming from immigration and the higher birth rate of illegals and other immigrants (tend to have larger birth rates). The sheer amount of growth needed to bring all these people to the standard of living inherent in the American Society itself will create much more growth than anyone can imagine.

This assumes that the nation's economy will grow and that (1) increased popluation and higher resource costs and (2) higher taxes resulting from increased costs for government-provided health care, education, and criminal justice costs won't stymie the economic growth.

Considering that the nation is already hemmoraging jobs because of foreign outsourcing and the importation of foreign labor on H-1B and L-1 visas, I don't see how adding millions of impoverished people is going to help matters.

One concern people have is the taxation issue, I consider this a moot point considering the red southern states have reduced the income tax component (Texas is income tax free) and the next generation of Mexican-Americans are registering to have access to the same services and opportunities as every other American citizen. Meanwhile these people are spending money just like every other consumer in the US; generating sales tax on all the objects and services bought.

How is it a moot point? The money to support government-provided health care, education, criminal justice costs, and environmental cleanup has to come from somewhere.

Illegals might spend money, but since they don't have much, they won't be spending much.

Economically, illegals and immigrants will be the one key driving force in maintaining the US status as a superpower and not one person in this world is less deserving of a first world lifestyle, whether that be in the US, Canada or elsewhere. (The Pragmatic Reformist)

The end result will be not merely the destructive effects of global labor wage arbitrage, but also the direct importation of poverty and the costs of popluation explosion.


Altruism is not a substitute for economic reasoning. Well-wishing and altruism do not change the facts of reality. Many people are well-wishing and want to help the poor in other countries, so much so that they'll go to any lengths to try to rationalize global labor wage arbitrage, population explosion, and overcrowding in the language of self interest. However, reality is reality. The solution to world poverty is not to crowd people together in a few first world countries (mass immigration and foreign work visas) while stealing wealth from some people and redistributing it from others (foreign outsourcing). Rather, the solution is to work to reduce overpopulation and to promote policies that will allow for real, self-generated and self-sustaining economic development in other countries (as opposed to the Indian and Chinese models which are dependent on receiving gifts of wealth from first world countries).

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

The "good old days" were not, in fact, noticably better in terms of earning power than the current economic situation. It is a myth that the average blue collar job of yesteryear allowed a greater standard of living than even TWO reasonably high paying white collar jobs today. The fact is that back in the good old days, the standard of living was simply LOWER. We do indeed spend more money, but it's not all going to cost of living increases. The number of vacations the average family takes, the number of cars they own, the size of their houses, and most of the rest of it has been going up for a long time. The reason people are more in debt than ever before is a matter of overreach than anything else, we have a problem today trying to live way beyond our means that didn't exist to this extent years ago. But aside from that, we're quite a bit better off than we were 50 years ago.

How much of that is a result of increased technology and productivity innovations?

I'd love to see an objective study about this subject. In the past a middle class famiy owned a house and a car provided by the labor of a single working person, the father, who supported a mother and two or three kids.

Today two people need to work in order to (maybe?) own a house (huge increase in real estate prices), raise two kids, and to struggle to pay for health insurance (unless it comes throught he job). The notion that every family has two members with "reasonably high paying white collar jobs" is a huge myth. (Know what a science Ph.D. postdoc is ??? Did you hear about the layoffs in the computer field and the outsourcing of jobs to India? Did you know that we have a huge oversupply of people with professional degrees, such as lawyers and MBAs?) It's much more likely that the husband or wife is unemployed or underemployed with student loans.

Today the nation has a huge underclass population that it didn't have in the past. The population has also exploded, increasing the strain on the environment and inflicting crowding on the populace.

I'd love to see an objective study that took all of those factors and more into account.

How do you account for the fact that in order to have a middle class job today people have to suffer the costs, both monetary and economic, of paying for 4+ years of college education (which doesn't guarantee middle class status by any means)? Having four+ years of poverty should count to lower quality of life. What about the costs, in terms of quality of life, of overcrowding (traffic congestion, higher costs for land)?


It all boils down to this:

At the end of the day, you cannot consume more than you produce. Reality is objective in nature and A is A. No amount of altruistic emotions and touchy-feely well-wishing is going to change that.

A certain critical mass of population is beneficial because of the efficiencies of having a division of labor, but after a certain point increased popluation comes with often overlooked and invisible costs. It wouldn't be good for you to live in a nation the size of the U.S. with a population of just 100 people. Likewise, it wouldn't be good for you to live in a nation the size of the U.S. with a population of 1 billion people. Rather, a population of 100 or 200 million would allow for a far superior quality of life.

 

[Stunt]

1) Eliminating borders and merging economies is capitalism; it's the free flow of goods, services and labour. When I listen to the elderly, they speak of coming to our countries with nothing and working at low skilled jobs to make ends meet. They were so motivated they were able to create a great life for themselves and their children. Illegals expect no less...sure they don't pay many taxes, but I'm sure they would if you gave them the opportunity. What happened to the American Dream where people of all races and prosperity can work hard and get rewarded for it? Are some consuming more than they contribute? Of course, so is 75% of the US population...should we aim to get rid of them too?

2) The US population did grow 33m a change of 11.6%. In the same time period Canada's population went up 15.3%. What is your point?

3) Currently I am willing to bet illegals are a net loss on the american people, not as much as people think as the backbone of the US economy is the consumer...a role illegals currently fill. If you allowed them to pay taxes and work within the country, they would indeed raise their standard of living from nothing. Immigrants tend to be the hardest working people in our society as they do not have the sense of entitlement inherent in most of the 1st world. Of course it's easier to blame the immigrants than understanding the underlying issues why things are the way they are.

You are overexaggerating the effects of illegals and are effectively giving those not born in the US the middle finger. Why should people who are hard working not be given the opportunity to succeed? Why were you so special as to be born into a nation as rich as the US? Can you honestly argue why you are more deserving of opportunity than people from other nations?

 

[hysperion]

Originally posted by: Stunt
1) Eliminating borders and merging economies is capitalism; it's the free flow of goods, services and labour. When I listen to the elderly, they speak of coming to our countries with nothing and working at low skilled jobs to make ends meet. They were so motivated they were able to create a great life for themselves and their children. Illegals expect no less...sure they don't pay many taxes, but I'm sure they would if you gave them the opportunity. What happened to the American Dream where people of all races and prosperity can work hard and get rewarded for it? Are some consuming more than they contribute? Of course, so is 75% of the US population...should we aim to get rid of them too?

2) The US population did grow 33m a change of 11.6%. In the same time period Canada's population went up 15.3%. What is your point?

3) Currently I am willing to bet illegals are a net loss on the american people, not as much as people think as the backbone of the US economy is the consumer...a role illegals currently fill. If you allowed them to pay taxes and work within the country, they would indeed raise their standard of living from nothing. Immigrants tend to be the hardest working people in our society as they do not have the sense of entitlement inherent in most of the 1st world. Of course it's easier to blame the immigrants than understanding the underlying issues why things are the way they are.

You are overexaggerating the effects of illegals and are effectively giving those not born in the US the middle finger. Why should people who are hard working not be given the opportunity to succeed? Why were you so special as to be born into a nation as rich as the US? Can you honestly argue why you are more deserving of opportunity than people from other nations?

Yes I can honestly argue that but why rehash a point that's already been made in 15 threads.........how bout this one- our forefathers put us in charge of this country as stewards- they didn't put Mexican's in charge- in fact they kicked them out......

What happened to the American Dream? The world isn't big enough for everyone to have it buddy..........the American dream is for Americans' not illegals flying third country flags......

 

[Stunt]

Your forefathers were immigrants, then their relatives imported cheap labour (slaves) for increased productivity. Both Canada and the US do the same with temporary workers. Corporations and your forefathers endorse immigration for domestic labour markets.

The American Dream is no less weak with the growth of population; America will continue to prosper with both legal and illegal immigration. We now live in a multicultural and diverse world where no person should be treated any different than another and no person should have more opportunity than another. The nationalist/patriotic mindset is digusting.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Stunt
First off, I want people to understand this is not a Republican/Democrat issue. There are politicans on both sides with differing opinions and should be treated as non-partisan.

The Ideology: The Socialists tend to be pro-protectionism through trade barriers and the like. The number one advocate of illegal immigrants are corporations who have been getting cheap labour for years. The deportation of illegals is by far the most liberal stance of all the options at the moment. (however this position is being represented by many so called 'conservatives')

The Numbers: People seem to have this perception that illegal immigration is accelerating at an amazing rate and must be stopped. In actual fact the following numbers taken from the economist indicate the number of illegals entering the United States is declining. This wedge issue is being blown out of proportion by the political parties, special interest groups and the media.

US Immigrants:
1980's: 0.65m legal, 0.15m illegal
1990-1994: 0.66m legal, 0.49m illegal
1995-2000: 0.65m legal, 0.75m illegal
2000-2004: 0.60m legal, 0.70m illegal

The Reasoning:The notion of illegals being a 'drian on society' is completely incorrect and people need to understand that illegals are not ruining the country but in fact helping it progress. If Europe has taught us anything, minimum wage, low population growth, and socialist protectionism leads to economic stagnation.

To understand how illegals are actually benefiting the US economy, one can turn to macroeconomics; unemployment is proportional to minimum wage. Even though the US itself has a minimum wage, illegals fill the otherwise impossible scenario of having no minimum wage.

Another aspect to consider is the American population; predictions these days estimate the population will be over 450m by 2050, most of that growth coming from immigration and the higher birth rate of illegals and other immigrants (tend to have larger birth rates). The sheer amount of growth needed to bring all these people to the standard of living inherent in the American Society itself will create much more growth than anyone can imagine.

One concern people have is the taxation issue, I consider this a moot point considering the red southern states have reduced the income tax component (Texas is income tax free) and the next generation of Mexican-Americans are registering to have access to the same services and opportunities as every other American citizen. Meanwhile these people are spending money just like every other consumer in the US; generating sales tax on all the objects and services bought.

Economically, illegals and immigrants will be the one key driving force in maintaining the US status as a superpower and not one person in this world is less deserving of a first world lifestyle, whether that be in the US, Canada or elsewhere. (The Pragmatic Reformist)

That's my take...Discuss.

SO lets open the flood gates for the educated Mexicans also. Why do they have to stand in line and jump through hoops for years to become Americans?

Hell, let's just make Mexico part of the US and solve the problem once and for all. Think of all the gas it would save, and then of course we could have their oil too!!!!!!

What's that? You say they want to have their country for "them" but ours is for "all of us"????

Why don't you just ah heck off back to Canada and worry about your own immigration laws.

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt
First off, I want people to understand this is not a Republican/Democrat issue. There are politicans on both sides with differing opinions and should be treated as non-partisan.

The Ideology: The Socialists tend to be pro-protectionism through trade barriers and the like. The number one advocate of illegal immigrants are corporations who have been getting cheap labour for years. The deportation of illegals is by far the most liberal stance of all the options at the moment. (however this position is being represented by many so called 'conservatives')

The Numbers: People seem to have this perception that illegal immigration is accelerating at an amazing rate and must be stopped. In actual fact the following numbers taken from the economist indicate the number of illegals entering the United States is declining. This wedge issue is being blown out of proportion by the political parties, special interest groups and the media.

US Immigrants:
1980's: 0.65m legal, 0.15m illegal
1990-1994: 0.66m legal, 0.49m illegal
1995-2000: 0.65m legal, 0.75m illegal
2000-2004: 0.60m legal, 0.70m illegal

The Reasoning:The notion of illegals being a 'drian on society' is completely incorrect and people need to understand that illegals are not ruining the country but in fact helping it progress. If Europe has taught us anything, minimum wage, low population growth, and socialist protectionism leads to economic stagnation.

To understand how illegals are actually benefiting the US economy, one can turn to macroeconomics; unemployment is proportional to minimum wage. Even though the US itself has a minimum wage, illegals fill the otherwise impossible scenario of having no minimum wage.

Another aspect to consider is the American population; predictions these days estimate the population will be over 450m by 2050, most of that growth coming from immigration and the higher birth rate of illegals and other immigrants (tend to have larger birth rates). The sheer amount of growth needed to bring all these people to the standard of living inherent in the American Society itself will create much more growth than anyone can imagine.

One concern people have is the taxation issue, I consider this a moot point considering the red southern states have reduced the income tax component (Texas is income tax free) and the next generation of Mexican-Americans are registering to have access to the same services and opportunities as every other American citizen. Meanwhile these people are spending money just like every other consumer in the US; generating sales tax on all the objects and services bought.

Economically, illegals and immigrants will be the one key driving force in maintaining the US status as a superpower and not one person in this world is less deserving of a first world lifestyle, whether that be in the US, Canada or elsewhere. (The Pragmatic Reformist)

That's my take...Discuss.

SO lets open the flood gates for the educated Mexicans also. Why do they have to stand in line and jump through hoops for years to become Americans?

Hell, let's just make Mexico part of the US and solve the problem once and for all. Think of all the gas it would save, and then of course we could have their oil too!!!!!!

What's that? You say they want to have their country for "them" but ours is for "all of us"????

Why don't you just ah heck off back to Canada and worry about your own immigration laws.

Send them all up to Canada...I'm sure Stunt wouldn't mind!

 

[Stunt]

As long as the country is wealthy enough to support the inital settling of the immigrants, most have the motivation to succeed. These people will pay their debt to society within their lifetimes. I have no issues with lower income people coming into my country; they are far more likely to boost both our standards of living here than in another country.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Stunt
As long as the country is wealthy enough to support the inital settling of the immigrants, most have the motivation to succeed. These people will pay their debt to society within their lifetimes. I have no issues with lower income people coming into my country; they are far more likely to boost both our standards of living here than in another country.

Big talk. Wait until someone comes along willing to do your job for half and will keep his nose clean because he is illegal and doesn't want to be deported. Then he sends every cent he can save, beg, or steal back to his home country to be invested.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt
As long as the country is wealthy enough to support the inital settling of the immigrants, most have the motivation to succeed. These people will pay their debt to society within their lifetimes. I have no issues with lower income people coming into my country; they are far more likely to boost both our standards of living here than in another country.

Big talk. Wait until someone comes along willing to do your job for half and will keep his nose clean because he is illegal and doesn't want to be deported. Then he sends every cent he can save, beg, or steal back to his home country to be invested.

1) If he is qualified to do my job...he will contribute far more than he consumes; definately doesn't deserve to be in a 3rd world country.

2) What do you think people do when they send foreign aid to other countries, donate to foster children. Is this wrong as well?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Stunt
1) Eliminating borders and merging economies is capitalism; it's the free flow of goods, services and labour. When I listen to the elderly, they speak of coming to our countries with nothing and working at low skilled jobs to make ends meet. They were so motivated they were able to create a great life for themselves and their children. Illegals expect no less...sure they don't pay many taxes, but I'm sure they would if you gave them the opportunity. What happened to the American Dream where people of all races and prosperity can work hard and get rewarded for it? Are some consuming more than they contribute? Of course, so is 75% of the US population...should we aim to get rid of them too?

How is effectively eliminating your border in order to merge your economy with a socialist economy capitalism?

I don't regard immigration as an issue of what type of economic system a nation has. It's an economic issue, but more in the social realm (in the same way that environmental and population growth issues are economic issues). For that reason I can't regard it as being capitalism. However, I do note that the mass immigration is motivated by poverty created by socialism abroad, so in essence the mass immigration (not to mention foreign outsourcing) is really similar to importing socialism, or at least the ravages of socialism.

2) The US population did grow 33m a change of 11.6%. In the same time period Canada's population went up 15.3%. What is your point?

My point is that the nation's population is increasing at a fast rate and much of it has been driven by mass immigration (and immigrants having children). In your post you cited numbers in The Economist claiming that the rate of immigration had not increased. Perhaps not, but my point is that the aggregate number and effect over time is large.

3) Currently I am willing to bet illegals are a net loss on the american people, not as much as people think as the backbone of the US economy is the consumer...a role illegals currently fill.

What are these poor people consuming? High-value-added products and services?

If you allowed them to pay taxes and work within the country, they would indeed raise their standard of living from nothing.

At whose expense? You could try to argue that our economy could grow, but that's hard to do since the nation has an over half-a-trillion dollar trade deficit (and increasing) and has been offshoring many of the jobs that would have otherwise remained in the country or been created.

Immigrants tend to be the hardest working people in our society as they do not have the sense of entitlement inherent in most of the 1st world. Of course it's easier to blame the immigrants than understanding the underlying issues why things are the way they are.

I don't take issue with that. I take issue with the notion that increasing our population, even if the increase is an increase of hard-working uneducated impoverished people, is a benefit to the other people in the United States at this time given our current government and trade policies.

You are overexaggerating the effects of illegals and are effectively giving those not born in the US the middle finger.

I think you are underexaggerating the effects and that your altruism leads you to ignore all of the negative aspects of the mass immigration of impoverished people that I have raised.

Why should people who are hard working not be given the opportunity to succeed?

At whose expense and in what country?

Why shouldn't they have the opportunity to succeed--in their own home countries and without inflicting costs on other people?

Does it really make sense for a quarter of the world's population to try to immigrate to a small portion of the world's landmass? (Allow unrestricted immigration and watch what happens.)

My recommendation is for these hard-working people to work hard at overthrowing their current government and redistributing any ill-gotten wealth in their own country and to fix up their own country (instituting birth conrol programs, a government of objective laws and moderated capitalism, etc.).

Why were you so special as to be born into a nation as rich as the US? Can you honestly argue why you are more deserving of opportunity than people from other nations?

In the context of your question--No. It was, in fact, luck. However, I'm not going to advocate world overpopulation and its accompanying environmental destruction and poverty, and I'm not doing to advocate that Americans become impoverished so that the rest of the world might be a little less impoverished.

My philosophy is not one of altruism, but rather, rational selfish interest. Having been fortunate enough to have been born in the U.S., I'll proudly advocate for government policies that promote my rational selfish interests. Had I been born in another country and had I come to have the same philosophy that I have now, I would also be advocating for change's to my nation's government.

Can you provide economic arguments to refute my arguments? What you say in your posts tends to sound good but lacks substance. I still have yet to see any economist or commentator refute global labor wage arbitrage in any form. Of course, as I've mentioned, the issue of immigration is more complex since it also involves environmental issues, overcrowding/population issues, taxes, crime, and the costs of government services.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Alright let's discuss!

First of all, minimum wage/unemployment relationships aren't even close to what your first year macro book said, unless the wage is quite high; since many low-skilled, low-productivity jobs still pay more than minimum wage, we can probably conclude that the wage isn't that high. This isn't the important part of the analysis though.

Increasing population for a given capital stock depresses wages because it offers more opportunities for capital investment. This effect *could* be outweighed by high productivity of the new workers, growing the capital stock faster than they dilute it.

The major problem with 'globalism' is that it puts all the power in corporate hands - free movement of goods, free movement of capital, highly restricted movement of employees. In theory, if all markets were equally capable of rearranging themselves to seek out the highest productivity (best returns to self), you would get an efficient melting pot in a hurry. Instead what you have is corporations seeking out the lowest wages, and able to do so much more easily than workers are able to seek out higher ones.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Stunt
As long as the country is wealthy enough to support the inital settling of the immigrants, most have the motivation to succeed. These people will pay their debt to society within their lifetimes. I have no issues with lower income people coming into my country; they are far more likely to boost both our standards of living here than in another country.

Big talk. Wait until someone comes along willing to do your job for half and will keep his nose clean because he is illegal and doesn't want to be deported. Then he sends every cent he can save, beg, or steal back to his home country to be invested.

1) If he is qualified to do my job...he will contribute far more than he consumes; definately doesn't deserve to be in a 3rd world country.

2) What do you think people do when they send foreign aid to other countries, donate to foster children. Is this wrong as well?

Like I said, big talk. Canada has it's own immigration laws and policies. There none of my business and ours are none of yours. If you think this is such a good idea, then please work to have these people come to your town and stay the hell out of US internal affairs.


Send your money wherever you like. Want my paypal address?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: hysperion
What happened to the American Dream? The world isn't big enough for everyone to have it buddy..........the American dream is for Americans' not illegals flying third country flags......

I wouldn't say that the world isn't big enough for everyone to enjoy middle class standards of living, but that the world only has a certain carrying capacity for certain standards of living and that if people in other countries want to have an American (or Western European or Japanese) standard of living that they need to first reign in their population problems (which China is doing, as odious as its methods may be) and then restructure their governments and possibly redistribute ill-begotten accumulated wealth.

Is it Americans' responsibility to do that for other countries? I don't think so.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Hell, let's just make Mexico part of the US and solve the problem once and for all. Think of all the gas it would save, and then of course we could have their oil too!!!!!!

If so many Mexicans want to be Americans...does it really make sense for the populations of two countries to live in the land mass of only one of those countries...perhaps we should annex Mexico.

I wonder how most Mexicans would feel about that and if they would welcome being part of the U.S. I think that as part of the transformation we'd have to redistribute any ill-gotten wealth that had accumulated amongst the Mexican wealthy.

One problem that I foresee is that it might hurt Americans' social freedoms. Aren't the Mexicans predominantly Catholic mystics and thus anti-abortion? So wouldn't the result of conquering and annexing Mexico be a huge amount of anti-abortion voters?

I also wonder about whether or not Mexicans believe in birth control and whether by annexing Mexico we might be inflicting a Mexican population explosion on ourselves. (In other words, would we be adding tens of millions of irrational religious mystics who reproduce quickly, inflicting the costs of increased population and environmental degredation on everyone else?)

If those aren't really issues, then I'm up for it.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Big talk. Wait until someone comes along willing to do your job for half and will keep his nose clean because he is illegal and doesn't want to be deported. Then he sends every cent he can save, beg, or steal back to his home country to be invested.

In Stunt's case, engineering, it's more likely that the work would end up being done in India or China and that his job displacement would thus result from foreign outsourcing instead. Of course, whether or not he'd be able to find half-decent underemployment-out-of-field as Canada reels from having millions of impoverished immigrants is another story.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Stunt
As long as the country is wealthy enough to support the inital settling of the immigrants, most have the motivation to succeed. These people will pay their debt to society within their lifetimes. I have no issues with lower income people coming into my country; they are far more likely to boost both our standards of living here than in another country.

Ah, so we have qualifications.

"As long as the country is wealthy enough to support..."

You see, the problem is that United States is not "wealthy enough" to support 12 million+ impoverished immigrants, especially when it's suffering from other forms of global labor wage arbitrage and already has tens of millions of impoverished people.

 

[Stunt]

You currently are supporting the illegals, the only thing you are missing out on is the income tax you refuse to take from them when you keep them as illegals.

As for the Mexico issue, I think the US could swallow the whole country if it wanted to; much like West Germany did to the East. The initial shock was hard, but the growth afterwards was astounding. Immigrants will keep the US as a superpower; you think the US has a hope in hell to compete against India/China?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Stunt
You currently are supporting the illegals, the only thing you are missing out on is the income tax you refuse to take from them when you keep them as illegals.

As for the Mexico issue, I think the US could swallow the whole country if it wanted to; much like West Germany did to the East. The initial shock was hard, but the growth afterwards was astounding. Immigrants will keep the US as a superpower; you think the US has a hope in hell to compete against India/China?

Well, here's your chance to become a superpower then, work with your goverment to get all that cheap labor to come to Canada. Start your own company and show us how it's done!!

While your at it, quit telling us how to run our own country. We already have 12 million illegals telling us what to do.