|
On May 13 2010 03:22 hacpee wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? Unfilled jobs? People worked at those jobs.Teenagers took those jobs way back. Fact is that the illegals take more from the system than they give in. There would be very little inflation if the federal government abolished minimum wage. That is the reason no one is hiring American Citizens or legal immigrants. The minimum wage prevents regular law abides from competing with the illegals for the work.
As long as they aren't collecting welfare, I don't really care. They aren't taking any job that a person with a college education would be trying to get.
|
On May 13 2010 03:31 RoosterSamurai wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:22 hacpee wrote:On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? Unfilled jobs? People worked at those jobs.Teenagers took those jobs way back. Fact is that the illegals take more from the system than they give in. There would be very little inflation if the federal government abolished minimum wage. That is the reason no one is hiring American Citizens or legal immigrants. The minimum wage prevents regular law abides from competing with the illegals for the work. As long as they aren't collecting welfare, I don't really care. They aren't taking any job that a person with a college education would be trying to get.
See, they will spawn children. A lot of children. These children will need medical care and schooling and food stamps. That's a nono. And these people taking lower end jobs will directly affect the college educated competition. Because people can't work low end jobs, they will be forced to get a college education to find work. That forces people who had no intention of getting the degree to get the degree. More people with degrees means more competition for jobs. Simple as that.
If you want a supply of cheap labor, guess what? We have a plentiful supply in the US. Get rid of the minimum wage and get rid of food stamps. If people can't get free food from the government, they will be forced to work whatever job they can find to feed themselves. There are plenty of jobs occupied by illegals that can be overtaken by legal immigrants or US citizens.
|
On May 13 2010 03:30 statix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 01:54 Krikkitone wrote:On May 12 2010 23:36 statix wrote:
Anything that doesn't treat American citizens differently just because of their race, color, or national origin. Does that sound too demanding? You do realize the law does that, it Specifically prohibits racial profiling. The cop can only ask for proof of immigration status if they have non-racially based reasonable suspicion that the individual is an illegal immigrant. So you're saying that racial profiling doesn't exist because the law prohibits it? What is an example of non-racially based reasonable suspicion? Having an accent?
Err actually you'll be surprised at how many illegal immigrants don't have something like a BASIC identification, much less the papers proving they are legal immigrants.
It is much easier to get non-racial RS than people think.
If I ask for someones identification and they have NOTHING it throws up red flags like you wouldn't believe.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 13 2010 03:10 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? I'm not sure if you're serious. Think for one moment: Large illegal immigrant + very few illegal immigrants pay taxes (for obvious reasons) + illegal immigrants use social services = FISCAL PROBLEM. Fortunately, you don't need to rely upon your logic to figure that one out. It has been well documented and studied. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.htmlhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/The-Fiscal-Cost-of-Low-Skill-Immigrants-to-State-and-Local-TaxpayersIf you had any familiarity with the business side of medicine and hospitals, you'd know that their number 1 concern, particularly in areas with large populations of illegal immigrants, is getting compensated for treating illegal immigrants! Lol@Heritage as a source. We already know Reagan would send all immigrants to the moon.
Do you even know who you're citing? CIS is a conservative anti-immigration lobbyist group and even from their own "study":
With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
...
Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs.
The bottom line is that illegal immigrant labor does not lower prices enough to warrant their net drain upon the economy. Besides, Americans can go do those jobs that illegals do, especially those that are desperate for work right now. Both of these sentences are untrue. America has transitioned to a service economy, even a short downturn isn't going to cause people to go back to picking lettuce and strawberries. The pool of legal low-skilled workers is tiny at this point.
Why don't you read this and get back to me.
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/ImmigrationCSR26.pdf
|
On May 13 2010 03:37 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:10 xDaunt wrote:On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? I'm not sure if you're serious. Think for one moment: Large illegal immigrant + very few illegal immigrants pay taxes (for obvious reasons) + illegal immigrants use social services = FISCAL PROBLEM. Fortunately, you don't need to rely upon your logic to figure that one out. It has been well documented and studied. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.htmlhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/The-Fiscal-Cost-of-Low-Skill-Immigrants-to-State-and-Local-TaxpayersIf you had any familiarity with the business side of medicine and hospitals, you'd know that their number 1 concern, particularly in areas with large populations of illegal immigrants, is getting compensated for treating illegal immigrants! Lol@Heritage as a source. We already know Reagan would send all immigrants to the moon. Do you even know who you're citing? CIS is a conservative anti-immigration lobbyist group and even from their own "study": Show nested quote +With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
...
Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs. Show nested quote +The bottom line is that illegal immigrant labor does not lower prices enough to warrant their net drain upon the economy. Besides, Americans can go do those jobs that illegals do, especially those that are desperate for work right now. Both of these sentences are untrue. America has transitioned to a service economy, even a short downturn isn't going to cause people to go back to picking lettuce and strawberries. The pool of legal low-skilled workers is tiny at this point. Why don't you read this and get back to me. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/ImmigrationCSR26.pdf
And how about the food stamps and others social services that their children use? All provided free by the state.Again, we have 10% unemployment. One in eight Americans are on food stamps. Take the food stamps away and they will in fact work the jobs the illegals worked before. Then we can kick out the illegals and have a lower unemployment rate.
|
No identification = no government provided services.
Is that how it works in the US?
Doesn't sound like it's all that great being an illegal in the US if that's the case
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 13 2010 03:23 hacpee wrote: There are 3 billion people who want to come into the US.
Your world view is extremely myopic. Most irregular immigrants in the US seasonal workers, or they would be if the border restrictions hadn't happened, meaning they actually have no intention of living in the United States. Tightening the border has actually turned many of them into permanent migrants because repeat entry is not reliable, and so their families come over to.
I don't know if you've been to the border in Arizona or Texas, but the quality of living is not higher than across the border. Not everyone wants to live in America, they just want jobs.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 13 2010 03:40 hacpee wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:37 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 03:10 xDaunt wrote:On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? I'm not sure if you're serious. Think for one moment: Large illegal immigrant + very few illegal immigrants pay taxes (for obvious reasons) + illegal immigrants use social services = FISCAL PROBLEM. Fortunately, you don't need to rely upon your logic to figure that one out. It has been well documented and studied. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.htmlhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/The-Fiscal-Cost-of-Low-Skill-Immigrants-to-State-and-Local-TaxpayersIf you had any familiarity with the business side of medicine and hospitals, you'd know that their number 1 concern, particularly in areas with large populations of illegal immigrants, is getting compensated for treating illegal immigrants! Lol@Heritage as a source. We already know Reagan would send all immigrants to the moon. Do you even know who you're citing? CIS is a conservative anti-immigration lobbyist group and even from their own "study": With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
...
Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs. The bottom line is that illegal immigrant labor does not lower prices enough to warrant their net drain upon the economy. Besides, Americans can go do those jobs that illegals do, especially those that are desperate for work right now. Both of these sentences are untrue. America has transitioned to a service economy, even a short downturn isn't going to cause people to go back to picking lettuce and strawberries. The pool of legal low-skilled workers is tiny at this point. Why don't you read this and get back to me. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/ImmigrationCSR26.pdf And how about the food stamps and others social services that their children use? All provided free by the state.Again, we have 10% unemployment. One in eight Americans are on food stamps. Take the food stamps away and they will in fact work the jobs the illegals worked before. Then we can kick out the illegals and have a lower unemployment rate. So in light of a temporary downturn, you're looking to reverse progress in the American economy. I can see why you're not an economist or a social scientists.
The practical matter is that it just won't happen, and immigration levels have a strong link to the state of the economy. It's not as if they've remained static this entire time.
|
On May 13 2010 03:46 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:40 hacpee wrote:On May 13 2010 03:37 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 03:10 xDaunt wrote:On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? I'm not sure if you're serious. Think for one moment: Large illegal immigrant + very few illegal immigrants pay taxes (for obvious reasons) + illegal immigrants use social services = FISCAL PROBLEM. Fortunately, you don't need to rely upon your logic to figure that one out. It has been well documented and studied. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.htmlhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/The-Fiscal-Cost-of-Low-Skill-Immigrants-to-State-and-Local-TaxpayersIf you had any familiarity with the business side of medicine and hospitals, you'd know that their number 1 concern, particularly in areas with large populations of illegal immigrants, is getting compensated for treating illegal immigrants! Lol@Heritage as a source. We already know Reagan would send all immigrants to the moon. Do you even know who you're citing? CIS is a conservative anti-immigration lobbyist group and even from their own "study": With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
...
Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs. The bottom line is that illegal immigrant labor does not lower prices enough to warrant their net drain upon the economy. Besides, Americans can go do those jobs that illegals do, especially those that are desperate for work right now. Both of these sentences are untrue. America has transitioned to a service economy, even a short downturn isn't going to cause people to go back to picking lettuce and strawberries. The pool of legal low-skilled workers is tiny at this point. Why don't you read this and get back to me. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/ImmigrationCSR26.pdf And how about the food stamps and others social services that their children use? All provided free by the state.Again, we have 10% unemployment. One in eight Americans are on food stamps. Take the food stamps away and they will in fact work the jobs the illegals worked before. Then we can kick out the illegals and have a lower unemployment rate. So in light of a temporary downturn, you're looking to reverse progress in the American economy. I can see why you're not an economist or a social scientists.
Most economists support getting rid of the minimum wage.
|
On May 13 2010 03:44 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:23 hacpee wrote: There are 3 billion people who want to come into the US. Your world view is extremely myopic. Most irregular immigrants in the US seasonal workers, or they would be if the border restrictions hadn't happened, meaning they actually have no intention of living in the United States. Tightening the border has actually turned many of them into permanent migrants because repeat entry is not reliable, and so their families come over to. I don't know if you've been to the border in Arizona or Texas, but the quality of living is not higher than across the border. Not everyone wants to live in America, they just want jobs.
Irregular immigrants? What are irregular immigrants? Do you mean illegal immigrants? They want jobs, good for them. Too bad but these jobs are American jobs. For American people. The mexicans can ask their own government for jobs.
|
On May 13 2010 03:23 hacpee wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:15 rageroll wrote:On May 13 2010 01:26 AmstAff wrote:
in germany we started the same way and noone said something, maybe other countrys learned from german history.
if they woulds start such a stupid law in germany i would start fighting on the streets and im serious about this. ++ Also, in general I think we'd all be better off with no borders. Any law that strengthens borders or gives cops more power is bad IMO. Lots of people in arizona hate this law. First and foremost there are shit tons of latinos here legally, human rights groups that sympathize with them, business owners who don't want half of their workforce / patrons to be dragged away in chains, and really anyone who pays attention to politics at all and isn't a biggot. No borders? Are you serious? There are 3 billion people who want to come into the US. Do you want us to support all those 3 billion? Fuck no. Fact is that 60% of Americans either support or think this law is too lenient.
"3 billion"? You're saying almost half the world wants to get into the US? You know Glenn Beck isn't a journalist, right? He's a "commentator" and therefore isn't bound by any legal obligation to report the truth
|
On May 13 2010 03:37 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:10 xDaunt wrote:On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? I'm not sure if you're serious. Think for one moment: Large illegal immigrant + very few illegal immigrants pay taxes (for obvious reasons) + illegal immigrants use social services = FISCAL PROBLEM. Fortunately, you don't need to rely upon your logic to figure that one out. It has been well documented and studied. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.htmlhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/The-Fiscal-Cost-of-Low-Skill-Immigrants-to-State-and-Local-TaxpayersIf you had any familiarity with the business side of medicine and hospitals, you'd know that their number 1 concern, particularly in areas with large populations of illegal immigrants, is getting compensated for treating illegal immigrants! Lol@Heritage as a source. We already know Reagan would send all immigrants to the moon. Do you even know who you're citing? CIS is a conservative anti-immigration lobbyist group and even from their own "study": Show nested quote +With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
...
Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs. Show nested quote +The bottom line is that illegal immigrant labor does not lower prices enough to warrant their net drain upon the economy. Besides, Americans can go do those jobs that illegals do, especially those that are desperate for work right now. Both of these sentences are untrue. America has transitioned to a service economy, even a short downturn isn't going to cause people to go back to picking lettuce and strawberries. The pool of legal low-skilled workers is tiny at this point. Why don't you read this and get back to me. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/ImmigrationCSR26.pdf
So, where exactly does this article disagree with anything that I said? On a side note, CFR apparently thinks fairly well of CIS and even cites to them and their study (look at p. 23 and 24). You can say CIS is not credible if you want, but I think you'll look pretty silly.
More importantly, the conclusion from CFR is that illegal immigration only has a minor negative effect upon the greater US economy, which I agree with. What CFR does not mention, but what is patently obvious, is that most of the economic burdens of illegal immigration fall upon the states with the largest populations of illegal immigrants. These, uncoincidentally, are the border states, such as Texas, California, and Arizona. In other words, the people of those states are bearing the brunt of the fiscal burden, which is was the whole point that I was making.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 13 2010 03:48 hacpee wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:46 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 03:40 hacpee wrote:On May 13 2010 03:37 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 03:10 xDaunt wrote:On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported? I'm not sure if you're serious. Think for one moment: Large illegal immigrant + very few illegal immigrants pay taxes (for obvious reasons) + illegal immigrants use social services = FISCAL PROBLEM. Fortunately, you don't need to rely upon your logic to figure that one out. It has been well documented and studied. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.htmlhttp://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/The-Fiscal-Cost-of-Low-Skill-Immigrants-to-State-and-Local-TaxpayersIf you had any familiarity with the business side of medicine and hospitals, you'd know that their number 1 concern, particularly in areas with large populations of illegal immigrants, is getting compensated for treating illegal immigrants! Lol@Heritage as a source. We already know Reagan would send all immigrants to the moon. Do you even know who you're citing? CIS is a conservative anti-immigration lobbyist group and even from their own "study": With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
...
Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs. The bottom line is that illegal immigrant labor does not lower prices enough to warrant their net drain upon the economy. Besides, Americans can go do those jobs that illegals do, especially those that are desperate for work right now. Both of these sentences are untrue. America has transitioned to a service economy, even a short downturn isn't going to cause people to go back to picking lettuce and strawberries. The pool of legal low-skilled workers is tiny at this point. Why don't you read this and get back to me. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/ImmigrationCSR26.pdf And how about the food stamps and others social services that their children use? All provided free by the state.Again, we have 10% unemployment. One in eight Americans are on food stamps. Take the food stamps away and they will in fact work the jobs the illegals worked before. Then we can kick out the illegals and have a lower unemployment rate. So in light of a temporary downturn, you're looking to reverse progress in the American economy. I can see why you're not an economist or a social scientists. Most economists support getting rid of the minimum wage.
You're good at blanket, uneducated statements.
The 2005 report of AEA members (American Economic Association) had something like 45% who thought it should be eliminated. That option had the most supporters of any, but it's clearly not "most" and that encompasses all economists. Labor economists tend to side in favor of a minimum wage.
|
United States12249 Posts
What I don't understand is the boycott of Arizona companies. If anything, those companies want to be able to hire more illegal immigrants because they can pay them less than minimum wage under the table for menial labor. That would mean that most companies would not be in favor of the law. Whether you're for or against the law, that part just makes no sense to me.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 13 2010 03:56 xDaunt wrote:
More importantly, the conclusion from CFR is that illegal immigration only has a minor negative effect upon the greater US economy, which I agree with. What CFR does not mention, but what is patently obvious, is that most of the economic burdens of illegal immigration fall upon the states with the largest populations of illegal immigrants. These, uncoincidentally, are the border states, such as Texas, California, and Arizona. In other words, the people of those states are bearing the brunt of the fiscal burden, which is was the whole point that I was making.
Wait, so if someone is working at a farm in California, how is their work going to benefit the economies of other states and not California?
Jesus christ, I can see why social science is such a failure at TL.
|
On May 13 2010 02:50 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 01:37 xDaunt wrote:
The unfortunate reality is that illegal immigrants take far more out of the system than they contribute to it. Period. This isn't about racism. It's about fiscal reality.
The unfortunately reality is that you can't back up this statement because it's simply not true. There's a short term loss in things like education, but there's no indication that Hispanic immigrants worsen societal ills (the opposite has largely found, actually) and they've become a necessary part of the economy. The notion that jobs are being taken away is flatly untrue because the work being done is otherwise unfilled 3D jobs, and the economies of Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California are all better off for having large immigrant populations, and for having irregular immigrants. Do you guys go grocery shopping at all? Do you know how much inflation would be caused if all illegal immigrants were found and deported?
Immigrant status is irrelevant, most poor people who make any use of government funded services are not net taxpayers and do take more out of the system than they contribute. Illegal Hispanic immigrants are most often poor, so their presence and use of the government services extended to them does create some burden on taxpayers(see:http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html)
. I think it's still up to debate whether or not Hispanic immigrants exacerbate societal ills. Nobody is going to do legitimate research on this because they'll be metaphorically crucified if they find the "wrong" conclusion. I gave my theory on this a few pages back, I don't think first generations immigrants are the ones causing the crime that frequently gets attributed to illegal immigrants, but rather their many many unsupported offspring.
On May 13 2010 04:00 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2010 03:56 xDaunt wrote:
More importantly, the conclusion from CFR is that illegal immigration only has a minor negative effect upon the greater US economy, which I agree with. What CFR does not mention, but what is patently obvious, is that most of the economic burdens of illegal immigration fall upon the states with the largest populations of illegal immigrants. These, uncoincidentally, are the border states, such as Texas, California, and Arizona. In other words, the people of those states are bearing the brunt of the fiscal burden, which is was the whole point that I was making. Wait, so if someone is working at a farm in California, how is their work going to benefit the economies of other states and not California? Jesus christ, I can see why social science is such a failure at TL.
Because people disagree with you? Yeah total failure.
The produce raised on Californian farms doesn't have to stay in California.
|
people arguing for illegal immigration are just retarded
first, it is illegal
second, it is unjust for everyone else in the world who wants to come to america but don't flank the states' borders to cross it like the mexicants
do you realize how much effort/time/money it took for my parents (from korea) to be allowed into this country?
this is not even going into the possible economic damage they create
|
On May 13 2010 03:37 Jibba wrote:Both of these sentences are untrue. America has transitioned to a service economy, even a short downturn isn't going to cause people to go back to picking lettuce and strawberries. The pool of legal low-skilled workers is tiny at this point. Why don't you read this and get back to me. http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/ImmigrationCSR26.pdf
If Americans aren't willing to pick strawberries and lettuce, then we shouldn't be producing strawberries and lettuce in America.
Or rather, if it is not possible to make a profit off of strawberries and lettuce with the high wages that would be needed to get Americans to pick them, then you shouldn't grow strawberries+lettuce in America.
Now if you think we should bring more people into America who are willing to pick that Strawberries+lettuce, then you should increase the number of legal immigrants (make the process easier and increase the numbers allowed) OR make it easier for legal immigrants and legal residents of orther countries to get American citizenship to become Americans.
(assuming that minimum wage/workplace conditions rules are not the problem)
However, illegal immigrants only economically survive by fraud (false papers for their employer) and/or black market economy (under the table payment)
|
And here I was sitting thinking that border security and protecting the interests of our citizens over foreigners was just common sense. Why don't we just get rid of passports, visas, customs, the entire legal process involved to travel between countries and just let people roam around wherever they want and whenever they want? Be it by land, sea, or air, why have borders at all? Every country in the world should go ahead and do this. It's not like we're all separate nations or anything or that there are any security implications, right? Silly me... oh, wait...
|
On May 13 2010 04:01 phosphorylation wrote:
people arguing for illegal immigration are just retarded
first, it is illegal
second, it is unjust for everyone else in the world who wants to come to america but don't flank the states' borders to cross it like the mexicants
do you realize how much effort/time/money it took for my parents (from korea) to be allowed into this country?
this is not even going into the possible economic damage they create
Pretty much this...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
