Just how silly is the illegal immigration issue?

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: Farang
Very silly. Most people don't realize that illegal immigrants yield a net economic benefit to this country and easily pay for the limited amount of social services they receive

The only positive economic effects provided by illegal immigrants go to the people who employ them. I remember on interview on TV where a company manager was spouting off about they can do so much more work for the same amount of money by hiring illegals.

Exactly hwo does that work? You guessed it... illegals do not have the same cost of living as I do. I pay for auto and health insurance. I follow county codes and only house my immediate family in my single family zoned home. Thus when the county charges me for property tax, their outlay for the services I require is for only one family. I could go on. Maybe its different in what ever part of the country you live in.... around here there is not benefit.

It is this type of thinking that perpetuates the myth. You are taking one element of their cost and one element of their benefit and comparing them. In reality the employers make more money, invest that money elsewhere, which leads to more job creation. In reality illegal immigrants spend the money they make in the United States (although much of it gets funneled out of the country, not a significant amount).

If you take a look at any comprehensive economic analysis of the situation, and don't just pick and choose specific portions, you will see that economists generally agree the immigrants are beneficial.

I don't think it is very surprising that the executive branch has never had a mass deportation or very strict border control, because they don't want to be responsible for the economic downturn we would experience afterwards. This unwritten rule we have about illegal immigrants being allowed in needs to end, and it needs to end in the form of a more open immigration policy.

Oh BS. If they stopped the illegals from coming in their would be no "economic downturn because there wasn't any economic upturn from them in the first place. As a matter of fact everythign you say is suspect, especially the part about the employers of the "llegals" investing their money and creating more jobs. Where, in Mexico where they can really take advantage of the workers, or just more jobs for illegals for the taxpayers to help support?

Poppycock and bulderdash.

Even if we stop illegals coming into the U.S. or immigrants for that matter. Whatever your point of view may be. We still have companies who are willing to outsource american jobs. This dosen't correct the problem. Other then criminal related activity illegal immigrants have little to no bearing on the economy v.s. Hersey factory giving jobs to the hispanics in Mexico. Allowing a company to go overseas and hiring 5,000 workers is not as worse as allowing 5,000 illegal immigrants in. At least with the illegal immigrants they are working for and in the United States......

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Farang
You seem to think that if the illegal immigrants were gone these jobs would still be getting done, their income being spent, their taxes being paid. We have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world. The millions of jobs illegal immigrants do aren't being taken away from other workers.. just about anybody who needs a job can find one in this economy. So no, that money wouldn't have been spent here, as nobody would have done the work to earn that money.

Ever heard of market forces? Or are you saying that all these landscaping, construction, etc jobs didn't exist?
I remember stories about people in construction who say how drastically the wages have fallen. The same surely happened in other fields.
Also, what's this talk about taxes being paid? Just because you say so doesn't make it so.

Now you refer to medical and school bills. Again you are taking a single aspect of their costs and applying it to the broader argument, when in fact it is clearly explained in any economic analysis that overall the costs they impose are outweighed by the taxes they pay.

What taxes?

Furthermore, it would simply be idiotic to kick them out of our schools...

What's all this touchy-feely speech about kicking them out of school?
You're the only one who raised this option.

As fas as economics go, and the whole "they're leeching off of welfare!" complaint goes, it is completely baseless.

You've yet to prove that.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: Farang
Very silly. Most people don't realize that illegal immigrants yield a net economic benefit to this country and easily pay for the limited amount of social services they receive

The only positive economic effects provided by illegal immigrants go to the people who employ them. I remember on interview on TV where a company manager was spouting off about they can do so much more work for the same amount of money by hiring illegals.

Exactly hwo does that work? You guessed it... illegals do not have the same cost of living as I do. I pay for auto and health insurance. I follow county codes and only house my immediate family in my single family zoned home. Thus when the county charges me for property tax, their outlay for the services I require is for only one family. I could go on. Maybe its different in what ever part of the country you live in.... around here there is not benefit.

It is this type of thinking that perpetuates the myth. You are taking one element of their cost and one element of their benefit and comparing them. In reality the employers make more money, invest that money elsewhere, which leads to more job creation. In reality illegal immigrants spend the money they make in the United States (although much of it gets funneled out of the country, not a significant amount).

If you take a look at any comprehensive economic analysis of the situation, and don't just pick and choose specific portions, you will see that economists generally agree the immigrants are beneficial.

I don't think it is very surprising that the executive branch has never had a mass deportation or very strict border control, because they don't want to be responsible for the economic downturn we would experience afterwards. This unwritten rule we have about illegal immigrants being allowed in needs to end, and it needs to end in the form of a more open immigration policy.

Oh BS. If they stopped the illegals from coming in their would be no "economic downturn because there wasn't any economic upturn from them in the first place. As a matter of fact everythign you say is suspect, especially the part about the employers of the "llegals" investing their money and creating more jobs. Where, in Mexico where they can really take advantage of the workers, or just more jobs for illegals for the taxpayers to help support?

Poppycock and bulderdash.

Even if we stop illegals coming into the U.S. or immigrants for that matter. Whatever your point of view may be. We still have companies who are willing to outsource american jobs. This dosen't correct the problem. Other then criminal related activity illegal immigrants have little to no bearing on the economy v.s. Hersey factory giving jobs to the hispanics in Mexico. Allowing a company to go overseas and hiring 5,000 workers is not as worse as allowing 5,000 illegal immigrants in. At least with the illegal immigrants they are working for and in the United States......

I really have no problem with bringing people into this country if we have a need for them. I just want them to come in legally and have the same rights as us otherwise we are shooting ourselves in the foot. So if we do need to open up the immigrant process lets get all the best and smartest that we can get our hands on.

Then let the market forces let everyone rise or sink to their own level. The way it is set-up now the illegals force down wages, living standards, worker's rights, etc. and the people who benifit from it the most (by far) are the people employing them. I don't believe for a minute the rest of us get enough benifit from them to pay their hidden costs.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Farang
You seem to think that if the illegal immigrants were gone these jobs would still be getting done, their income being spent, their taxes being paid. We have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world. The millions of jobs illegal immigrants do aren't being taken away from other workers.. just about anybody who needs a job can find one in this economy. So no, that money wouldn't have been spent here, as nobody would have done the work to earn that money.

Ever heard of market forces? Or are you saying that all these landscaping, construction, etc jobs didn't exist?
I remember stories about people in construction who say how drastically the wages have fallen. The same surely happened in other fields.
Also, what's this talk about taxes being paid? Just because you say so doesn't make it so.

Now you refer to medical and school bills. Again you are taking a single aspect of their costs and applying it to the broader argument, when in fact it is clearly explained in any economic analysis that overall the costs they impose are outweighed by the taxes they pay.

What taxes?

Furthermore, it would simply be idiotic to kick them out of our schools...

What's all this touchy-feely speech about kicking them out of school?
You're the only one who raised this option.

As fas as economics go, and the whole "they're leeching off of welfare!" complaint goes, it is completely baseless.

You've yet to prove that.

The Social Security Administration includes illegal immigrant contributions, up to $7 billion annually, in their projections. Stephen C. Goss, the administration?s chief actuary, estimates that two-thirds of undocumented workers pay payroll taxes. While immigrants are contributing such large sums into the social programs of this country, illegal aliens are ineligible to receive Social Security, Medicaid, food stamps, and most other public benefits.

Porter, Eduardo. 2005. "Illegal Immigrants Are Bolstering Social Security with Billions."
The New York Times. 5 April 2005.

Also illegal immigrants cause the wages of skilled workers to rise, according to economist Don J. DeVortez.

DeVortez, Don J. ?Immigration Policy: Methods of Economic Assessment.? International
Migration Review. 40 (2): 390?418.

 

[1EZduzit]

Gee, those illegals are really getting screwed. Maybe they should just stay home?

 

[imported_dna]

Well, I'm not about to start counting lines, so maybe you'll be so kind to provide a quote.....

As for the NY Times article, it is indeed an excellent piece of propaganda which avoids the matter of how much do the illegals use in services. Besides, isn't this article doing exactly what you were complainging about earlier: focusing on only one aspect of the issue?

Hard to believe they aren't using any medical services.....

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: dna
Well, I'm not about to start counting lines, so maybe you'll be so kind to provide a quote.....

As for the NY Times article, it is indeed an excellent piece of propaganda which avoids the matter of how much do the illegals use in services. Besides, isn't this article doing exactly what you were complainging about earlier: focusing on only one aspect of the issue?

Hard to believe they aren't using any medical services.....

As for a comprehensive cost/benefit analysis, if you can get access to DeVortez's piece (I got it through my library) he explains that they contribute more than their total cost. If you can't find it, every comprehensive economic analysis I have found supports this so try to find one.

Illegal immigrants do not use social security, as well as a number of public benefits like I explained. They do use medical services and that has its costs, but what I'm trying to explain here is that these tit-for-tat arguments you're making can be refuted and in the end there is an economic gain.

 

[imported_dna]

Sorry, can't find the exact paper you're talking about.

I guess I'll just have to take your word for it, since it's too difficult to cut & paste, right?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: dna
Well, I'm not about to start counting lines, so maybe you'll be so kind to provide a quote.....

As for the NY Times article, it is indeed an excellent piece of propaganda which avoids the matter of how much do the illegals use in services. Besides, isn't this article doing exactly what you were complainging about earlier: focusing on only one aspect of the issue?

Hard to believe they aren't using any medical services.....

As for a comprehensive cost/benefit analysis, if you can get access to DeVortez's piece (I got it through my library) he explains that they contribute more than their total cost. If you can't find it, every comprehensive economic analysis I have found supports this so try to find one.

Illegal immigrants do not use social security, as well as a number of public benefits like I explained. They do use medical services and that has its costs, but what I'm trying to explain here is that these tit-for-tat arguments you're making can be refuted and in the end there is an economic gain.

It's not about what they produce/consume.

 

[imported_dna]

You're right -- it's mostly about maintaining law and order.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Your going to score a A on your paper

And your probably going to score the same with your life

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: dna
You're right -- it's mostly about maintaining law and order.

Actually, it's about how they change the distribution of income. Once you understand that, you'll understand why the people in charge have no interest in preventing illegal immigration.

It's not an 'unwinnable battle' and the USA would be better off fixing the illegal situation, and replacing it with increased controlled immigration.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: dna
You're right -- it's mostly about maintaining law and order.

Actually, it's about how they change the distribution of income. Once you understand that, you'll understand why the people in charge have no interest in preventing illegal immigration.

It's not an 'unwinnable battle' and the USA would be better off fixing the illegal situation, and replacing it with increased controlled immigration.

This is where we agree. A much more open immigration policy coupled with increased enforcement (but not a border fence) would be the best solution. Once we take thousands of migrants out from the desert and put them on legal pathways to coming here, border patrol can better stop what would be a significantly smaller amount of people from crossing the border illegally.

I think a problem arises when we let these people in legally and that argument I brought up about them paying taxes but not recieving benefits would no longer apply, as their cost would dramatically increase with their documented status. I don't think there is much of a sinister motive behind ignoring the issue other than the government knows when it starts acknowledging these workers as legitimate, it is going to have to foot the bill. Another case of the executive branch not wanting to be responsible for the economic hit we may take afterwards.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: dna
You're right -- it's mostly about maintaining law and order.

Actually, it's about how they change the distribution of income. Once you understand that, you'll understand why the people in charge have no interest in preventing illegal immigration.

It's not an 'unwinnable battle' and the USA would be better off fixing the illegal situation, and replacing it with increased controlled immigration.

This is where we agree. A much more open immigration policy coupled with increased enforcement (but not a border fence) would be the best solution. Once we take thousands of migrants out from the desert and put them on legal pathways to coming here, border patrol can better stop what would be a significantly smaller amount of people from crossing the border illegally.

I think a problem arises when we let these people in legally and that argument I brought up about them paying taxes but not recieving benefits would no longer apply, as their cost would dramatically increase with their documented status. I don't think there is much of a sinister motive behind ignoring the issue other than the government knows when it starts acknowledging these workers as legitimate, it is going to have to foot the bill. Another case of the executive branch not wanting to be responsible for the economic hit we may take afterwards.

The sinister motive is that Americans will never stand for the level of legal immigration that you get from illegal immigration. Take away the massive influx of low-skilled labour, and wages go up. Good for most, bad for the people running the show.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: dna
You're right -- it's mostly about maintaining law and order.

Actually, it's about how they change the distribution of income. Once you understand that, you'll understand why the people in charge have no interest in preventing illegal immigration.

It's not an 'unwinnable battle' and the USA would be better off fixing the illegal situation, and replacing it with increased controlled immigration.

This is where we agree. A much more open immigration policy coupled with increased enforcement (but not a border fence) would be the best solution. Once we take thousands of migrants out from the desert and put them on legal pathways to coming here, border patrol can better stop what would be a significantly smaller amount of people from crossing the border illegally.

I think a problem arises when we let these people in legally and that argument I brought up about them paying taxes but not recieving benefits would no longer apply, as their cost would dramatically increase with their documented status. I don't think there is much of a sinister motive behind ignoring the issue other than the government knows when it starts acknowledging these workers as legitimate, it is going to have to foot the bill. Another case of the executive branch not wanting to be responsible for the economic hit we may take afterwards.

You seem impervious to the fact that once we let people come in legally they won't be so willing to work cheap and/or do all the sh-t jobs. That is going to cause that "economic hit" that your fond of trying to scare us with.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: dna
You're right -- it's mostly about maintaining law and order.

Actually, it's about how they change the distribution of income. Once you understand that, you'll understand why the people in charge have no interest in preventing illegal immigration.

It's not an 'unwinnable battle' and the USA would be better off fixing the illegal situation, and replacing it with increased controlled immigration.

This is where we agree. A much more open immigration policy coupled with increased enforcement (but not a border fence) would be the best solution. Once we take thousands of migrants out from the desert and put them on legal pathways to coming here, border patrol can better stop what would be a significantly smaller amount of people from crossing the border illegally.

I think a problem arises when we let these people in legally and that argument I brought up about them paying taxes but not recieving benefits would no longer apply, as their cost would dramatically increase with their documented status. I don't think there is much of a sinister motive behind ignoring the issue other than the government knows when it starts acknowledging these workers as legitimate, it is going to have to foot the bill. Another case of the executive branch not wanting to be responsible for the economic hit we may take afterwards.

The sinister motive is that Americans will never stand for the level of legal immigration that you get from illegal immigration. Take away the massive influx of low-skilled labour, and wages go up. Good for most, bad for the people running the show.

That is not true. I'm sorry I can't copy and paste the graph that is being cited in this quote, but in the economic analysis I keep referring to DeVortez says

"However, their work using dated 1980 data allows them to conclude that: ?domestic (U.S.) groups with human capital endowments divergent from those of the immigrant experience allow wage increases . . .(because they are complements)? (Gang and Rivera-Batiz, 1994:173). In other words, if unskilled labor arrives in the United States, the wage of skilled domestic labor rises and a version of Figure VII holds."

 

[1EZduzit]

However, their work using dated 1980 data allows them to conclude that

ROFLMAO!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Farang
That is not true. I'm sorry I can't copy and paste the graph that is being cited in this quote, but in the economic analysis I keep referring to DeVortez says

"However, their work using dated 1980 data allows them to conclude that: ?domestic (U.S.) groups with human capital endowments divergent from those of the immigrant experience allow wage increases . . .(because they are complements)? (Gang and Rivera-Batiz, 1994:173). In other words, if unskilled labor arrives in the United States, the wage of skilled domestic labor rises and a version of Figure VII holds."

The wage of any labour for which the added population is qualified drops. The wage of near-substitutes (semi-skilled labour, say, in an office, which may previously have been lower-paid, or undesirable) also drops, as more people shift to these easy to access sectors.

The effect on highly-skilled labour is pretty ambiguous, except to the extent that increased population, without increased skilled labour increases total demand for that labour (even poor people occasionally need doctors and lawyers).

But the lower and lower-middle classes are unambiguously worse off under the 'illegal policy'.

 

[babylon5]

You should have seen the data from 1860, it shows wages increased 1000%!

 

[Farang]

3chordcharlie, if you have anything to cite I'd be interested to learn more about what you're talking about. What I've read contradicts what you say in the long-run, although you may be right in the short-run.

I think I'm done with this whole discussion, though, because it is almost impossible to have a productive debate here. It seems the best response most people can come up with is to pick one thing out of your argument and make some sarcastic, irrelevant comment without making an attempt to present anything of their own. If you have a problem with using 1980 data please explain why today's model would show an opposite effect.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Farang
3chordcharlie, if you have anything to cite I'd be interested to learn more about what you're talking about. What I've read contradicts what you say in the long-run, although you may be right in the short-run.

I think I'm done with this whole discussion, though, because it is almost impossible to have a productive debate here. It seems the best response most people can come up with is to pick one thing out of your argument and make some sarcastic, irrelevant comment without making an attempt to present anything of their own. If you have a problem with using 1980 data please explain why today's model would show an opposite effect.

The economy in 1980 wasn't being affected by the same kinds of outsourcing pressures, massive economic class-divide, etc. While I don't follow American illegal immigration all that closely, the magnitude of the influx may have been different, too.

As for what I said, there's no debate available for lower and lower-middle class results. Increase the labour-pool with the same capital pool, and wages go down. Given that a substantial portion of these earnings then leave the country, the net effect is not really a good thing for 'America', but it's very good if you're the one doing the hiring.

 

[Farang]

You're citing short term effects. Of course there is a time when an immigrant comes along and takes a job a low-class American may have been able to get, or simply increases the supply of labor and drives wages down. But in the long run they promote economic growth which leads to job creation, and those displaced initially are forced to find knew skills and thus move up in the labor market. With unemployment just about as low as it can get I don't buy the 'they're stealing out jobs' argument because they are enough jobs to go around, and so long as your state has minimum wage laws you're already getting paid above your market price if you are the lowest class of worker.

Interesting statistic I found, I believe this was form the New York times:

Nevada $10.05 ; 7.50%
California $8.71 ; 6.90%
Florida $8.99 ; 5.20%
Maryland $9.84 ; 4.50%
New Jersey$9.03 ; 4.10%
New York $9.02 ; 3.30%
Nebraska $9.08 ; 2.30%
Ohio $8.37 ; 1.00%
Kentucky $8.73 ; 0.90%

State's average wage for high school dropouts with the percentage of the population that is an illegal immigrant. As you can see the percentage has no huge effect, an in fact drives up the wage slightly overall. I found a deeper analysis of this that took into account cost-of-living, I believe its conclusion was that the percentage had no effect (as opposed to a slight benefit). I'll try to find that.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Farang
You're citing short term effects. Of course there is a time when an immigrant comes along and takes a job a low-class American may have been able to get, or simply increases the supply of labor and drives wages down. But in the long run they promote economic growth which leads to job creation, and those displaced initially are forced to find knew skills and thus move up in the labor market. With unemployment just about as low as it can get I don't buy the 'they're stealing out jobs' argument because they are enough jobs to go around, and so long as your state has minimum wage laws you're already getting paid above your market price if you are the lowest class of worker.

Interesting statistic I found, I believe this was form the New York times:

Nevada $10.05 ; 7.50%
California $8.71 ; 6.90%
Florida $8.99 ; 5.20%
Maryland $9.84 ; 4.50%
New Jersey$9.03 ; 4.10%
New York $9.02 ; 3.30%
Nebraska $9.08 ; 2.30%
Ohio $8.37 ; 1.00%
Kentucky $8.73 ; 0.90%

State's average wage for high school dropouts with the percentage of the population that is an illegal immigrant. As you can see the percentage has no huge effect, an in fact drives up the wage slightly overall. I found a deeper analysis of this that took into account cost-of-living, I believe its conclusion was that the percentage had no effect (as opposed to a slight benefit). I'll try to find that.

There are always enough jobs to go around, unless you create artificial deflation of the per capita money supply (i.e. massively restrict credit). This is because the economy is not a zero-sum game.

One problem is capital dilution, which absolutely restricts income potential. This could be countered over time as long as your savings rate stays the same, but illegals tend to send a lot of income 'back home'. When money leaves the country, especially when not as part of 'trade', you affect the growth in capital.

Another problem is that the whole economy cannot consist of skilled workers, because there are jobs that need doing, and there are people who aren't capable of highly skilled work.

The individual choice to enter, for example, the service industry can be beneficial, but when you couple the dilution of capital with the increased demand for low-wage jobs, and throw in a good dose of outsourcing actual production (manufacturing), you create an economy that doesn't produce anything, has a permanent trade deficit, a growing income gap between 'investors' and 'labourers'... remind you of anywhere?

To top it all off, as long as the flow of illegals stays the same/grows, you are always in the 'short term'.

Edit - I'll be happy to talk about outsourcing as well, and the effect of a growing labour pool on that are real, but the overall situation is what it is - manufacturing is moving overseas.

 

[StageLeft]

Most people in this country are just too damn stupid to care about anything anymore except gas prices and Sanjaya. The illegal immigration issue is an afront to the country and I swear I, as an immigrant, take more offense to it than most citizens.