Immigration Issues and Reform

[HeelYeah2012]

I personally am okay with it because all the data presented so far points to it making our country better, not worse.

I can see how someone wouldn't want them to come here, if for instance they didn't like those peoples customs or culture. That makes more sense to me. I may not agree with it, but it makes sense. (editing to add: I understand the logic of someone wanting to limit the border based on xenophobia or racism way more than on economic or crime reasons. The economic reasons don't hold up to the facts. But I can't help how someone feels about something, that's on their experiences if that makes sense)

I fail to see how its an unlimited drain, if an unlimited amount of people does not exist in our world. There's a finite amount of human beings that could potentially come here.

And yeah, our country pays for billion dollar football stadiums. Hell we pay billions each year in something as useless as fireworks on July 4th collectively, so we sure as hell can pay more to teachers, and thus more in educating students no matter where they come from.

To my knowledge, no country in the world permits unrestricted, unlimited immigration by anyone who pleases to come.

Do you really think the USA should adopt immigration policy that would make us a complete outlier globally?

 

[superrific]

Can you show your math on the $5 per person? You said $15 billion per year and 10 million illegal immigrants. How is that $5 per person? I’m getting $1,500 per person per year. I’m not disputing that the number is small in the grand scheme (if that number is even accurate)

I meant $5 per American (and have edited accordingly). That was my mistake. The math is very rough. It could be $6 per American, or $7 or $4. I don't think it matters.

 

[lightbluenc]

To my knowledge, no country in the world permits unrestricted, unlimited immigration by anyone who pleases to come.

Do you really think the USA should adopt immigration policy that would make us a complete outlier globally?

I don't think we ever would go back to that, no. And I'm ok with that too. Whatever makes our country better, and helps the most people overall I'm good with. If all the data point sto more positives (and so far it seems like it does), then we should do that. If the data points to more negatives then we should try to restrict it more.

I personally, don't count spending more money on people, as a negative though. That's where we could differ possibly.

 

[superrific]

To my knowledge, no country in the world permits unrestricted, unlimited immigration by anyone who pleases to come.

Do you really think the USA should adopt immigration policy that would make us a complete outlier globally?

The United States did for about the first hundred years of its existence. Then for another 50 or so, immigration was barely restricted except for Chinese. It's unclear why being a global outlier would matter to you. We are also the only country that elects its president with a contraption like the Electoral College; the only country in the last hundred years to attempt a 1500 mile long wall to keep people out.

 

[rodoheel]

I read this link that cford posted on the other thread, that appears to be the source of a some stats HY2012 has posted. It's from remarks the director of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a right-wing, anti-immigration organization, was planning to give to Congress:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://budget.house.gov/imo/media/doc/the_cost_of_illegal_immigration_to_taxpayers.pdf

CFord has already identified some issues and a counter-study with some different numbers. Here are some obvious problems I see with the study finding that undocumented immigrants are a net drain:

--in calculating the amounts of taxes paid by undocumented immigrants, he only included federal income tax, Social Security tax, and Medicaid taxes. This is ignoring, among other things, state and local taxes that undocumented immigrants pay - especially sales tax and property tax.

--In stating their impact on the American economy, the author says: "Illegal immigrants do add perhaps $321 billion to the nation's GDP" but then qualifies it by saying "almost all the increase in economic activity goes to the illegal immigrants themselves in the form of wages." But this makes no sense - the immigrants are spending those wages. They are buying food and housing and clothes and all sorts of other things. The author is clearly just trying to handwave away the huge impact on the economy these immigrants have.

--The author also does not attempt to account for what the consequences would be for the American economy if all of these people were taken out of it. The author repeatedly says, essentially, that it doesn't help to add people who do low-skill, low-wage jobs to the economy because it drags the per capita GDP down. but someone has to do those jobs. There is demand for those jobs that will go unfilled without cheap immigrant labor to do them; the result will be contraction of the American economy and/or higher prices for everything if the cost of work in those industries goes up. We can't simply stop bringing immigrants into the country and assume that means we won't need dishwashers, painters, construction workers, gardeners, hospitality workers, and fruit pickers anymore.

--As I already noted in response to another of HY2012's posts, the author treats welfare benefits provided to the children or other household members of undocumented immigrants the same as providing benefits to the undocumented immigrants themselves. I think this is simply wrong from a methodological standpoint. But in any event, the statistic that a higher percentage of those households use welfare benefits is meaningless if you're not attempting to determine how much per household is actually received. I would be willing to bet that the households led by undocumented immigrants use much less in benefits than the average "non-undocumented" household that receives them, especially because it's so much harder for people who are undocumented to claim many types of benefits.

 

[lightbluenc]

I read this link that cford posted on the other thread, that appears to be the source of a some stats HY2012 has posted. It's from remarks the director of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a right-wing, anti-immigration organization, was planning to give to Congress:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://budget.house.gov/imo/media/doc/the_cost_of_illegal_immigration_to_taxpayers.pdf

CFord has already identified some issues and a counter-study with some different numbers. Here are some obvious problems I see with the study finding that undocumented immigrants are a net drain:

--in calculating the amounts of taxes paid by undocumented immigrants, he only included federal income tax, Social Security tax, and Medicaid taxes. This is ignoring, among other things, state and local taxes that undocumented immigrants pay - especially sales tax and property tax.

--In stating their impact on the American economy, the author says: "Illegal immigrants do add perhaps $321 billion to the nation's GDP" but then qualifies it by saying "almost all the increase in economic activity goes to the illegal immigrants themselves in the form of wages." But this makes no sense - the immigrants are spending those wages. They are buying food and housing and clothes and all sorts of other things. The author is clearly just trying to handwave away the huge impact on the economy these immigrants have.

--The author also does not attempt to account for what the consequences would be for the American economy if all of these people were taken out of it. The author repeatedly says, essentially, that it doesn't help to add people who do low-skill, low-wage jobs to the economy because it drags the per capita GDP down. but someone has to do those jobs. There is demand for those jobs that will go unfilled without cheap immigrant labor to do them; the result will be contraction of the American economy and/or higher prices for everything if the cost of work in those industries goes up. We can't simply stop bringing immigrants into the country and assume that means we won't need dishwashers, painters, construction workers, gardeners, hospitality workers, and fruit pickers anymore.

--As I already noted in response to another of HY2012's posts, the author treats welfare benefits provided to the children or other household members of undocumented immigrants the same as providing benefits to the undocumented immigrants themselves. I think this is simply wrong from a methodological standpoint. But in any event, the statistic that a higher percentage of those households use welfare benefits is meaningless if you're not attempting to determine how much per household is actually received. I would be willing to bet that the households led by undocumented immigrants use much less in benefits than the average "non-undocumented" household that receives them, especially because it's so much harder for people who are undocumented to claim many types of benefits.

This is great info, thanks!

 

[CRHeel94]

To my knowledge, no country in the world permits unrestricted, unlimited immigration by anyone who pleases to come.

Do you really think the USA should adopt immigration policy that would make us a complete outlier globally?

Unlimited, unfiltered immigration is a non-starter for most people. Just on the basis of security, its paramount for countries to know who's coming in or not.

What's also clear is that the current system isn't working. People often say "Have them come here legally". The crux of the problem is that migrating legally as an unskilled or low-skilled laborer is basically impossible. Also, the US economy needs a healthy dose of this type of laborer in certain industries. What you definitely don't want is people coming in and living off welfare or turning to crime. What's needed is some guest worker program: as long as you're gainfully employed, you're welcome. Will that happen, probably not.

There does need to be a thoughtful discussion of what US immigration policy should be from a strategic standpoint. How many to let in? Skilled vs unskilled?

Something that worries me on this side of the fence is the brain drain from the developing world to the developed world. How the heck are we ever going to get ahead if our most talented individuals leave to the US, Canada and Europe.

 

[lawtig02]

This is a really, really good interview with Sen. Lankford. He’s as diplomatic as he can be, but there’s not a single iota of doubt who he blames for the failure to pass the border bill.

 

[superrific]

Something that worries me on this side of the fence is the brain drain from the developing world to the developed world. How the heck are we ever going to get ahead if our most talented individuals leave to the US, Canada and Europe.

Ask India. They've been dealing with the brain drain for a century.

 

[mpaer]

Unlimited, unfiltered immigration is a non-starter for most people. Just on the basis of security, its paramount for countries to know who's coming in or not.

What's also clear is that the current system isn't working. People often say "Have them come here legally". The crux of the problem is that migrating legally as an unskilled or low-skilled laborer is basically impossible. Also, the US economy needs a healthy dose of this type of laborer in certain industries. What you definitely don't want is people coming in and living off welfare or turning to crime. What's needed is some guest worker program: as long as you're gainfully employed, you're welcome. Will that happen, probably not.

There does need to be a thoughtful discussion of what US immigration policy should be from a strategic standpoint. How many to let in? Skilled vs unskilled?

Something that worries me on this side of the fence is the brain drain from the developing world to the developed world. How the heck are we ever going to get ahead if our most talented individuals leave to the US, Canada and Europe.

Our beloved Capitalism

 

[ChileG]

Do you really think the USA should adopt immigration policy that would make us a complete outlier globally?

Do you apply that same logic to healthcare?

 

[rodoheel]

I read this link that cford posted on the other thread, that appears to be the source of a some stats HY2012 has posted. It's from remarks the director of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a right-wing, anti-immigration organization, was planning to give to Congress:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://budget.house.gov/imo/media/doc/the_cost_of_illegal_immigration_to_taxpayers.pdf

CFord has already identified some issues and a counter-study with some different numbers. Here are some obvious problems I see with the study finding that undocumented immigrants are a net drain:

--in calculating the amounts of taxes paid by undocumented immigrants, he only included federal income tax, Social Security tax, and Medicaid taxes. This is ignoring, among other things, state and local taxes that undocumented immigrants pay - especially sales tax and property tax.

--In stating their impact on the American economy, the author says: "Illegal immigrants do add perhaps $321 billion to the nation's GDP" but then qualifies it by saying "almost all the increase in economic activity goes to the illegal immigrants themselves in the form of wages." But this makes no sense - the immigrants are spending those wages. They are buying food and housing and clothes and all sorts of other things. The author is clearly just trying to handwave away the huge impact on the economy these immigrants have.

--The author also does not attempt to account for what the consequences would be for the American economy if all of these people were taken out of it. The author repeatedly says, essentially, that it doesn't help to add people who do low-skill, low-wage jobs to the economy because it drags the per capita GDP down. but someone has to do those jobs. There is demand for those jobs that will go unfilled without cheap immigrant labor to do them; the result will be contraction of the American economy and/or higher prices for everything if the cost of work in those industries goes up. We can't simply stop bringing immigrants into the country and assume that means we won't need dishwashers, painters, construction workers, gardeners, hospitality workers, and fruit pickers anymore.

--As I already noted in response to another of HY2012's posts, the author treats welfare benefits provided to the children or other household members of undocumented immigrants the same as providing benefits to the undocumented immigrants themselves. I think this is simply wrong from a methodological standpoint. But in any event, the statistic that a higher percentage of those households use welfare benefits is meaningless if you're not attempting to determine how much per household is actually received. I would be willing to bet that the households led by undocumented immigrants use much less in benefits than the average "non-undocumented" household that receives them, especially because it's so much harder for people who are undocumented to claim many types of benefits.

Hey HY12, you gonna respond to any of this? You based some of your support for Trump on immigration and the belief that undocumented immigrants are a "drain" on US resources.