You do understand that this tracks almost precisely with population, right?
Actually, they pay property taxes as part of their rent. If I buy an iPod, I’ve bought it for whatever Steve Jobs will sel it for. Of course he’s taken his expenses into account.
A relationship with a landlord is a whole 'nother animal, though. I insist that renters pay property taxers only because I had a landlord come to me when my rent was late and say, "I need to pay my property taxes. PLease give me the rent. " When Steve Jobs does the same thing, I’ll say buyers of iPods pay property taxes.
Nonsense. “Rent” is just the price of living in an apartment for a period of time. You’re not paying property taxes.
He’s an economist specializing in immigration issues.
They’re economists, for Christ’s sake. Of course they refute each other all of the time. They also sometimes agree with each other. Not that that has any bearing on anything, since I never made any such claims. I simply claimed that Chiswick ridiculed Borjas with the above quoted line. He did.
You still haven’t found it. I’m now pretty certain that I’m more familiar with Borjas’s work than you are, and I’m STILL waiting for that cite. I get the feeling that you paraphrased a paraphrase of Borjas by some xenophobe blogger. Borjas has issues with immigration in general, and usually tries to wrap illegal and legal immigration together in his “studies”, or completely ignore the differences between the two, as he knows full well that attempting to quantify anything about illegal immigrants is a pretty tough sell. Hell, we don’t even know how many there are with any certainty. Most estimates differ from each other by millions, and I’ve seen the number range from 7 to 28 million, depending on who you ask. Your claim was stricly about illegal immigrants, and as stated a few sentences back, I STILL haven’t gotten the cite I keep asking for. Are you going to demonstrate that he said what you claim he did, or am I expected to prove he never said it?
You’re enabling your landlord to pay his property taxes. HIs property taxes are higher because he’s able to get some of that money from you. Again, I had a landlord who was upfront about this relationship.
Why not provide a specific cite. That is, a citation where he refutes Borjas based on ascertainable evidence.
Modern Mexico is a Spanish creation and said creation had a tenous connection to California et al.
You know if those of you who claim immigration is hurting this country really loved America, you’d volunteer to go back to whatever country your ancestors came from.
In Heaven’s Door, Borjas suggest that the net benefit of Mexican immigration to the American South West (sans aged parents and children) is roughly 10 billion.
A 10 billion net return on immigration is a rather poor result of such a massive influx of people. So yes, Borjas said exactly that but for the net result of direct workers.
Agreed if America always had an open door policy. Immigration to America has, historically, been one of peaks and valleys. That is, when it got to the point where it was overwhelming it was cut back. Currently, however, it’s been pushed by big business who want a literal endless source of cheap labour.
How come the US invaded Mexico instead of Spain then to get those lands? And (with the Mexican government at gun point) signed Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo with Mexico over the issue? Doesn’t seem the US believed Spain owned those lands, and other then some postadhoc justification I really don’t see the logic in attributing them to Spain.
You are aware of the difference between such things as capitalism, and communism correct? I suppose I should have specified countries similar to the US in government and market composition, but eh don’t wanna have to draw a map.
Actually China, since they started shifting from communism, and India’s standard of living is increasing. Mexico has additional problems.
Anyone in Mexico who wants to live in the US pretty much can, legally or no, including many in the area I live in, and one can still find decent jobs. Other then Xenophobia I don’t see what the issue is.
Oh come now. You need to provide some facts if you are going to make such absurd claims. The borders were legally defined. The only thing tenous was the US respect for international law. Something that apparently continues to this day.
But those jobs won’t be in America, as by & large, very little clothing is made in the USA. And the little there is- is not being bought by the dudes in the lower income brackets
DMC* "Once again, you state that he notes: "illegal immigrants actually consume more in benefits, health care costs etc. than they actually contribute to the economy.“That’s what I want a cite for, nothing else”* Do you really want this cite or are you just busting Lochdale’s chops? Becuase anyone with even a slight nodding aquantance with Economics knows that the entirety of the lower income population consume more in benefits, health care costs etc than they actually contribute to the economy (They have to- it’s simple math). And, “Illegals” are almost always in that lower income group.
even sven "Americans are happy to whine and bitch about their jobs going overseas. But few have the guts to do what their own ancestors did- pack up, say their goodbyes, and head out to greener pastures." What the fuck are you taling about? What “greener pastures”? The jobs aren’t going to where the pastures are greener, I hope you know. An American who is skiled at Computer Customer Service would take a HUGE pay hit by moving to India and working there in a Customer Service call centre.
This paraphrase and the one I asked for a cite for aren’t even in the same hemisphere, much less ballpark.
How do you go from a professor noting that specifically Mexican immigrants (with aboslutely no reference to their legal status), llimited to a specific geographci area of the country, have a net benefit (notice that says net?), and somehow turn that into illegal immigrants consume more in benefits, health care costs, etc., that they actually contribute to the econmy?
Those are closer to being opposite positions than identical ones.
That would be news to my uncle, who actually did just that. He’s enjoyed an enormous jump in his standard of living and now has a large three-bedroom apartment in a gated community outside of Delhi, an on-call driver, a housekeeper that comes in several times a week and all of the perks of being a member of the Indian middle class. Yeah, it’s a huge pay hit, but considering that a good meal at a top restaurant there may cost six dollars if you live it up, it’s can often work in your favor. I’ve actually been to an Indian call center, and the people working there are healthy, happy, supporting their families (even in one wage earner households) and enjoying life on their $400 a month.
Man can not live by cotton alone. 
They’re going to need and want things like food, cars, clothes, books, watches, food, tvs, computers, many things, and they’ll work they way up until they can afford them.
And buying an iPod enables Apple to pay their property taxes, so what?
And how do you figure that “His property taxes are higher because he’s able to get some money from you”? Cite, please.
Sorry for the hijack, folks.
Yes. If you rent a place in a village where no one wants to live, you’ll find that your landlord doesn’t pay much in property taxes, that his rate is pretty close to the R-1 rate, and that the R-1 rate is pretty low, too. If you rent a place in a village where a lot of people want to live, you’ll find that the R-2 rates are higher. If you buy a house in taht village, you’ll find that the R-1 rates are pretty high as well.
Hmm. Maybe things are different in NY than here. Property tax (here) is based on the value of the property, not on the ability of your tenants to pay rent.
I think it’s a supply demand kinda thing. More renters increases demand, which increase the rent you can get, which increases the worth of the property, which increases property tax. Also increases normal housing values too. Rent gets too high and people start looking to buy which increases demand.