Here’s another economist on illegal immigration…maybe you’ve heard of this one?
Paul Krugman on Illegal immigrants]
This was written by Krugman in 2006. He has since gone on the record explaining the views he puts forth (this was on CNN)by saying that
what he said in this article doesn’t matter anyway because the 12-15 million illegal are here now and they aren’t going anywhere.
Basically the best anyone can say about illegal immigrants is that they are a wash to the economy. The economy possibly breaks even with them,
but maybe it doesn’t.
He shows supporting articles by other economists in his NYT piece that show the economy does NOT break even with illegal immigrants.
It suffers ultimately from them. Obviously.
Another horrible and damaging thing about this is that any contributions the illegals make is the kind that creates wealth for the wealthy.
Growth only for growths sake alone…one of the most insidious eroders of the environment and the eco-system.
Speaking of growth…the US population has gone up 25% in 10 years due to illegal immigration.
A 25% increase in primarily Pagan/Catholics, believers in CAM, alternative healing, mysticism, black magics etc…
At best the economy breaks even with illegals. At best. But that’s the economy alone. We suffer socially, politically(Big Time!!) and environmentally from illegal immigrants.
The illegal immigrants are nothing more than a political football that gets carried to and fro upon the Political Field. Bandied about to succor
various factions. Meanwhile the American People suffer even further from yet another chapter in the dog and pony show.
The bottom line is the illegals aren’t going anywhere. Krugman is right about that. And more are going to keep coming.
Here's another economist on illegal immigration...maybe you've heard of this one?I’m seeing a lot of the same facts here, just rearranged and a different conclusion drawn. My article didn’t say just how much the economy benefitted, Krugmann says a 1% increase on the average income. I’d say that’s actually quite a bit. He agrees that there are pockets where there is a negative affect and he associates that affect with places that don’t treat low income earners well. This points to workers’ rights reform, not immigration, like I’ve been saying. As always, you skip over things you don’t like, such as him saying “basic decency" says we should treat these people like people once they get here. And that an idea like a law making it illegal to provide Medicare to an “illegal" is immoral. He also mentions something I hadn’t heard of. Low income workers are an essential part of capitalism, but undocumenteds have the additional benefit that they don’t vote. What a boon for the rich, no wonder they don’t want immigration reform. Whenever I hear “we have to control the flow" in any context, I never hear a coherent argument for why. I recently read something that said it would be better to just open the border. Among many reasons, workers could come here, work, then go home. They would be just like the rich American who owns a factory in Mexico. Crazy, I know. Here it is]
b]the US population has gone up 25% in 10 years due to illegal immigration. A 25% increase in primarily Pagan/Catholics, believers in CAM, alternative healing, mysticism, black magics etc..If you're going to make up facts, pick facts that are hard to verify] And what is that second sentence? You're blaming Mexico for belief in alternative healing? PBS puts up shows about Wayne Dyer during pledge week, blame them.
This type of stuff is very prevalent in Latin America. Very Prevalent.
Mexican national Warlock]
Any of us who have lived in areas with large concentrations of Latinos or worked alongside them can easily testify to this.
I’ve seen various examples of Black magic, mysticism/roman catholicism, pagan idology, woo and many other things hundreds of times in my travels.
This type of stuff is very prevalent in Latin America. Very Prevalent. Mexican national Warlock] Any of us who have lived in areas with large concentrations of Latinos or worked alongside them can easily testify to this. I've seen various examples of Black magic, mysticism/roman catholicism, pagan idology, woo and many other things hundreds of times in my travels.How do you not know that saying "any of us who have lived in areas with large concentrations...." is not a statement that you are judging the whole of a population based on the few individuals that you have seen? How do those words come out of your head without some kind of filter?
How do you not know that saying "any of us who have lived in areas with large concentrations...." is not a statement that you are judging the whole of a population based on the few individuals that you have seen? How do those words come out of your head without some kind of filter?That's a valid question. The same way I can know about Latin American foods, Music styles, or other customs. It pretty basic general knowledge. I don't know about your experiences. I can only assume you haven't seen much of anything. Myself, I've lived in Texas, New Mexico and have visited Juarez, Chihuahua on numerous occasions. I've also stopped into about a hundred or more Tiendas and Mercados between Connecticut and Los Angeles. I have worked alongside numerous people from Latin America and they have personally showed me rites, rituals etc or told me of the HEAVY prevalence of these customs and mysticisms in their own lands or homes. You did watch the video of the Warlock casting spells on the soccer ball didn't you? That was for their equivalent of the SuperBowl. But hey...who's judging? That's the spice of life right?
You wrote: "Chan is not a citizen. He is competing with similarly disadvantaged workers." Yes, that's why Chan works for such low wages. All undocumented workers are competing with each other but they are also competing with US citizens who could demand higher wages if the market were not flooded with undocumented workers willing to work for less. This is Economics 101. You wrote: "Peri says the presence of undocumented workers helps increase skilled/legal worker pay." Can you explain how that works? How does the presence of illegal workers with no leverage and willing to work for less than minimum wage increase pay for skilled legal workers? Explain that. You wrote: "Undocumented workers contribute $15 billion to SSA and only take out $1 billion per year." Can you explain how that works when undocumented workers have no Social Security number and can't get one? If any are putting money in, few would be in a position to collect Social Security payments yet, so how can they "take out" anything? You wrote: "The dollar value of the benefits far outweigh the costs, so the government could just transfer extra funds to those local populations that need more help." What extra funds? How would that work? The Social Security Fund is self sustaining and is used only for pensions, disability and widows' and orphans' benefits. Money cannot be transferred for other uses. You wrote, "I would include some overall reform of rights and benefits for low income workers, but that is probably politically impossible in the short term." And in the long term, as well. Everyone who contributes to Social Security gets the same benefits. Anyone who does not contribute doesn't get any benefits. Please explain how undocumented workers contribute to the Social Security fund when they can't get Social Security numbers. If you are talking about new laws giving the undocumented benefits you don't know how government works nor how unlikely it is for the government to create new benefit schemes for undocumented workers--or even legal low-income workers. LoisYes, it's economics 101 says that capitalism likes to have a pool of cheap labor and a pool of unemployed, so they can keep their labor costs low. We've covered that. How lower income people work as helpers, freeing up higher income/higher skilled workers to do their higher skilled work is covered in the article. People from Mexico can get an ITIN and pay SSI. We covered this earlier in the thread. If it were simple, then we'd probably solve it. That's why people say immigration is "broken". It means it's too complex to function in a way that meets our needs. "Extra funds" refers to the contributions foreigners make to the economy in general that could be used in the few places where they are causing problems. That's one of the roles of government. You benefit every day because there are other people contributing to this country's health.
You did watch the video of the Warlock casting spells on the soccer ball didn't you? That was for their equivalent of the SuperBowl. But hey...who's judging? That's the spice of life right?I didn't watch the video because it would tell me nothing about their economic impact. You are judging. How else would anyone take your earlier statement about 'them' bringing this stuff to 'murica.
You wrote: "Chan is not a citizen. He is competing with similarly disadvantaged workers." Yes, that's why Chan works for such low wages. All undocumented workers are competing with each other but they are also competing with US citizens who could demand higher wages if the market were not flooded with undocumented workers willing to work for less. This is Economics 101. You wrote: "Peri says the presence of undocumented workers helps increase skilled/legal worker pay." Can you explain how that works? How does the presence of illegal workers with no leverage and willing to work for less than minimum wage increase pay for skilled legal workers? Explain that. You wrote: "Undocumented workers contribute $15 billion to SSA and only take out $1 billion per year." Can you explain how that works when undocumented workers have no Social Security number and can't get one? If any are putting money in, few would be in a position to collect Social Security payments yet, so how can they "take out" anything? You wrote: "The dollar value of the benefits far outweigh the costs, so the government could just transfer extra funds to those local populations that need more help." What extra funds? How would that work? The Social Security Fund is self sustaining and is used only for pensions, disability and widows' and orphans' benefits. Money cannot be transferred for other uses. You wrote, "I would include some overall reform of rights and benefits for low income workers, but that is probably politically impossible in the short term." And in the long term, as well. Everyone who contributes to Social Security gets the same benefits. Anyone who does not contribute doesn't get any benefits. Please explain how undocumented workers contribute to the Social Security fund when they can't get Social Security numbers. If you are talking about new laws giving the undocumented benefits you don't know how government works nor how unlikely it is for the government to create new benefit schemes for undocumented workers--or even legal low-income workers. LoisYes, it's economics 101 says that capitalism likes to have a pool of cheap labor and a pool of unemployed, so they can keep their labor costs low. We've covered that. How lower income people work as helpers, freeing up higher income/higher skilled workers to do their higher skilled work is covered in the article. People from Mexico can get an ITIN and pay SSI. We covered this earlier in the thread. If it were simple, then we'd probably solve it. That's why people say immigration is "broken". It means it's too complex to function in a way that meets our needs. "Extra funds" refers to the contributions foreigners make to the economy in general that could be used in the few places where they are causing problems. That's one of the roles of government. You benefit every day because there are other people contributing to this country's health. The ITIN (Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) is not used by llegal immigrants. It is issued through US companies that are legally hiring foreign naionals so the foreign bationals can pay Federal and State Income taxes and for making out Federal or State income tax returns and for Social Security payments. They can legally collect SS benefits when they are eligible. ITINs have nothing to do with illegal immigrants, who don't pay income taxes and don't pay into Social Security, and who can't get an ITIN. "Extra funds" paid into Social Security are paid by foreign nationals legally paying into the fund, not illegal immigrants. No money goes into Social Security from undocumented immigrants unless they have stolen a Social Security number and are ilegally using it to get and hold a job. When they do that it is not paid nto their accounts but into the account of fhe person whose Social Security number was stolen. The Social Security administration has no way of knowing where the "extra funds" are coming from. There is nothing "too complex" about US immigration law. The system is broken because we have too many people breaking our democratically passed laws and too many businesses also breaking our laws by illegally hiring desperate people for the lowest of wages and flooding the market with cheap labor. It's true when they say about the wealthy privatizing their profits while socializing their losses and expenses. It's the American way, after all. THAT is the reason our immigration system is broken. It has nothing to do with being "too complex." Lois
I didn't watch the video because it would tell me nothing about their economic impact. You are judging. How else would anyone take your earlier statement about 'them' bringing this stuff to 'murica.The economic impact is negligible. The overall impact is very negative. Especially when you factor in population surge, birthrates, impact on environment, crime rates, impacts on social services, infrastructure, utilities, etc. I have no idea what "murica" means. I don't know how people would take my statements. I guess it all depends on how they feel about CAM, mystcial healing, witchcraft, quasi-catholic/pagan religion, spellcasting etc. It's called curandero. I'm surprised to learn that some regional health insurances are covering the services of curanderos in the US. Wow!! 12-15 million here now. High birthrates! Many more coming from South of the Border. It's a great impact.
What is meant by “immigration is broken” is painfully obvious to policy makers, citizens and economists.
For 60 years illegal immigrants have come into this country unabated. At first it was good for an economic model based on agricultural workers
or certain types of temporary workers at a certain population level.
What is meant by “immigration is broken” is that it it has run wild. There’s no way of stopping it, there’s far too many illegal immigrants here now, and there is nothing we can do about it now.
That is exactly what is meant by “immigration is broken”!
Paul Krugman outlined that perfectly. He’s a very respected economist who is not afraid to read the writing on the wall out loud.
The best he or any politician can say now is “It’s too late now, they are all here already and there’s more coming”.
That’s the reality of the situation.
What we have now is millions more people who would have been low level Consumers in their home lands now being converted into
high level consumers.
I don’t think I have to spell out what Consumption means in regards to environmental systems ranging from pollution to living space to resource management and infrastructure.
Everything else is a Political Football and an easy touchy-feely issue to get behind for millions of uninformed, bourgeois Proto-Liberals to get behind
while they are drinking Lattes and screaming not in my backyard.
These proto liberals have been duped by “Progressive” wings of the Democratic Party who only see these illegals and their supporters as potential voters.
The real math, policy, and guidance has gone right out the window like every other issue in this country.
Lois
If someone came here on a work visa, got an ITIN, then overstayed that visa, by your definition they would be “illegal". They would also be working and I assume the employer would still want them. There are many ways to become “illegal". For someone who keeps telling others that they don’t know things, you have spent very little time educating yourself on this subject. Here’s a good place to start.]
I tried to find a graphic showing the complex system of visas and exceptions but I couldn’t find a simple page showing the complexity. There are lists of them in various places. You could try this:]
I found this while I was poking around, pretty simple statement about how reform is better than isolation:]
Finally, when the article said “extra funds" it was not referring to SSA money. It was referring to the general increase to the GDP that results from more low cost labor within the borders. It’s basically the government’s job to estimate benefits like that and figure out what services they need to provide and what infrastructure to build so we all continue to have that benefit. We let people in pretty freely 100 years ago. Most of them got educated, got better jobs and are now contributing to this country. Speaking of, how did you get here Lois? Can you trace your ancestry back to the Mayflower?
What is meant by "immigration is broken" is painfully obvious to policy makers, citizens and economists. For 60 years illegal immigrants have come into this country unabated. At first it was good for an economic model based on agricultural workers or certain types of temporary workers at a certain population level. What is meant by "immigration is broken" is that it it has run wild. There's no way of stopping it, there's far too many illegal immigrants here now, and there is nothing we can do about it now. That is exactly what is meant by "immigration is broken"! Paul Krugman outlined that perfectly. He's a very respected economist who is not afraid to read the writing on the wall out loud. The best he or any politician can say now is "It's too late now, they are all here already and there's more coming". That's the reality of the situation. What we have now is millions more people who would have been low level Consumers in their home lands now being converted into high level consumers. I don't think I have to spell out what Consumption means in regards to environmental systems ranging from pollution to living space to resource management and infrastructure. Everything else is a Political Football and an easy touchy-feely issue to get behind for millions of uninformed, bourgeois Proto-Liberals to get behind while they are drinking Lattes and screaming not in my backyard. These proto liberals have been duped by "Progressive" wings of the Democratic Party who only see these illegals and their supporters as potential voters. The real math, policy, and guidance has gone right out the window like every other issue in this country.Nothing like a simplistic view. Do you really think that conservatives haven't been equally duped by the Republican party who see illegals as people to be exploited? Lois
What we have now is millions more people who would have been low level Consumers in their home lands now being converted into high level consumers. I don't think I have to spell out what Consumption means in regards to environmental systems ranging from pollution to living space to resource management and ountry.Man, you are all over the map. You're saying that consumerism is bad for ... what? Certainly not for the economy. Buying stuff IS the economy. What I'm hearing is, Americans are over-consumers, we pollute more, we take more of our share of the world's resources. Agreed. But then you say, if we bring foreigners into this country, they will act just like us, making it an out of control situation. Maybe. Or we could stop being such slobs and be better stewards of the planet. But no, what I'm hearing you say is, let's build a big wall around the country and let raw materials in so we can make plastic crap to play with it, then throw it in the oceans and let that be someone else's problem. I admit it sounds nice, but I don't think it's workable. To grow our economy, we need more people. We can't keep living with a trade deficit, just buying junk from each other. And we're already seeing how we need a huge military to make this plan work and that is not going so well. So, I guess I'll start thinking about my neighbor and learning how to share.
Nothing like a simplistic view. Do you really think that conservatives haven't been equally duped by the Republican party who see illegals as people to be exploited? LoisObviously it wasn't simplistic enough for you. You should really learn to think before you blurt out stuff Lois. I've mentioned that before. What part of "illegal aliens are a political football" don't you understand? Football implies a game that consists of two sides.
Man, you are all over the map. You're saying that consumerism is bad for ... what? Certainly not for the economy. Buying stuff IS the economy. What I'm hearing is, Americans are over-consumers, we pollute more, we take more of our share of the world's resources. Agreed. But then you say, if we bring foreigners into this country, they will act just like us, making it an out of control situation. Maybe. Or we could stop being such slobs and be better stewards of the planet. But no, what I'm hearing you say is, let's build a big wall around the country and let raw materials in so we can make plastic crap to play with it, then throw it in the oceans and let that be someone else's problem. I admit it sounds nice, but I don't think it's workable. To grow our economy, we need more people. We can't keep living with a trade deficit, just buying junk from each other. And we're already seeing how we need a huge military to make this plan work and that is not going so well. So, I guess I'll start thinking about my neighbor and learning how to share.Yeah I'm all over the map. :roll: I think I saw your ideas on a bumper sticker somewhere. Very profound. I like the "buying stuff IS the economy" part too. You keep oscillating between: Nobody has a right to citizenship-Illegal aliens are refugees who need our help-illegal aliens are good for the economy-and then back again. 1. The first one is an ideological idea that is fantastical. 2. The second one is propaganda to garner support for millions of illegal aliens who have an adverse effect on the US. 3. At best illegal aliens offer a neutral, no gain/no loss to the economy. So what's your story Lausten? Are you the bureaucratic liberal who has absolutely has no skin in the game, but instead latches on to bumper sticker type politics because you can't think for yourself? Or are you personally connected to the illegal alien/immigrant issue? I hope it's the second one. That would make sense. I wouldn't hold that against you. The first choice though is just pathetic. With all of the faulty support you have brought with your argument it means you are making choices based on bad information. That's just unacceptable in my book. Of course if you are using that information for propaganda because you have skin in the game-well Kudos to you! I don't blame you one bit.
Nothing like a simplistic view. Do you really think that conservatives haven't been equally duped by the Republican party who see illegals as people to be exploited? LoisObviously it wasn't simplistic enough for you. You should really learn to think before you blurt out stuff Lois. I've mentioned that before. What part of "illegal aliens are a political football" don't you understand? Football implies a game that consists of two sides. Yes, it does, but your arguments imply that there is only one simplistic view--that everything bad is the fault of liberals. You might try taking your own advice about thinking before you shoot your mouth off. But I guess that's too much to hope for. Lois
Yes, it does, but your arguments imply that there is only one simplistic view--that everything bad is the fault of liberals. You might try taking your own advice about thinking before you shoot your mouth off. But I guess that's too much to hope for. LoisWe're talking about illegal immigration here Lois, not "everything bad". Don't confuse what you gather from your reading comprehension versus what my arguments imply. Please! Last time I checked there weren't too many Conservative Voters(Voters! Let's see if you can understand that concept...) that were pleading for illegal immigrant rights and amnesties. Hence I don't really have to argue against too many conservative talking points right now, do I? Nobody's arguing here from the Conservative point of view...the small Conservative Bloc who wants a steady supply of cheap, exploitable labor. Did you notice that? Nobody is denying that a small minority of Conservatives(who want a cheap source of labor) have duped the vast conservative constituency. I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but the vast conservative voter constituency shares the same views as you and I on immigration. Are you aware of this? Did you possibly think that the vast majority of conservative Americans want the illegals here because they are a cheap source of labor? Just answer this part for me please, so we can clear this up.
Yeah I'm all over the map. :roll: I think I saw your ideas on a bumper sticker somewhere. Very profound. I like the "buying stuff IS the economy" part too. You keep oscillating between: Nobody has a right to citizenship-Illegal aliens are refugees who need our help-illegal aliens are good for the economy-and then back again. 1. The first one is an ideological idea that is fantastical. 2. The second one is propaganda to garner support for millions of illegal aliens who have an adverse effect on the US. 3. At best illegal aliens offer a neutral, no gain/no loss to the economy. So what's your story Lausten? Are you the bureaucratic liberal who has absolutely has no skin in the game, but instead latches on to bumper sticker type politics because you can't think for yourself? Or are you personally connected to the illegal alien/immigrant issue? I hope it's the second one. That would make sense. I wouldn't hold that against you. The first choice though is just pathetic. With all of the faulty support you have brought with your argument it means you are making choices based on bad information. That's just unacceptable in my book. Of course if you are using that information for propaganda because you have skin in the game-well Kudos to you! I don't blame you one bit.You are such a bore. What bumper sticker are you talking about? Care about your neighbor? A fundamental principle for civil societies throughout history? I don't know what you think I said about NOBODY having a right to citizenship. Maybe you confused what I said about the rights that citizenship does and does not give you. I did say SOME aliens who cross the border illegally are refugees, specifically the kids from Guatemala, and they should be treated as such. I also said generally workers are good for the economy, even if our laws are not meeting the need, causing them to be labeled as "illegal". So your propaganda argument falls apart. And your "skin in the game" is just weird. Your only defense is to just make claims about the economy based on no data and dismiss the data I've supplied. A totally unreasonable argument.
I don't know what you think I said about NOBODY having a right to citizenship.Right here is where you said that:
Lausten-No. It’s the entire history of prejudice. Get people to hate other people who are just like them, except for their ethnicity. Get them to focus on fighting each other for the scraps you are throwing them. If I’m wrong, then you need to come up with a justification for why you get to have everything you have. You can’t deny that America was built on war and slavery. If we somehow deserve this land and others don’t, then you are saying all of that is just and right.You didn't answer my question Lausten. Are you just a bureaucratic liberal that can't think for yourself, or do you have some personal connection to immigration? I already told you I gave you a pass on any emotional feelings you may have for illegal immigrants. That's honorable. Unfortunately you are pushing all of the mis-information and propaganda a little too much. One of your funnier moments was: Bill Moyers on Immigration. :lol: Oh well then, that settles it! Plus insisting that illegal immigrants are an economic boon to the US. Which is joke. They may be a boon to the exploiters who wish to get wealthy off of their labor but as far as any overall economic benefit to the economy as a whole it's a wash. You pulled the race/ethnicity card. You've tried just about everything Lausten except explaining how people who break the law are beneficial to a nation that enacted these laws for a reason. It makes me think you have a personal stake in this issue. I'm sorry if you aren't up to snuff on English phrases: From Wikipedia-
To have "skin in the game" is to have incurred monetary risk by being invested in achieving a goal. In the phrase, "skin" is a synecdoche for the person involved, and "game" is the metaphor for the actions on whatever field of play is at reference.[1] The aphorism is particularly common in business, finance, and gambling, and is also used in politics.All in all Lausten you're wrong. So I guess I don't need to come up with a justification for everything I have. The only thing you're right about, is that you have good intentions. You do have good intentions.