How much of the cost of illegal immigration is caused by the fact that it is illegal? Because surely legal immigration has some of the same issues in terms of sending money overseas, etc.
Personally I have no problem with an extremely liberal immigration policy
Legal immigrants do this too.
I guess it could be said that a domestic citizen working the same job would be very unlikely to spend/send money out of the country. But what about all the money-marts? Without the immigrants they’d be out of work. Sending money to South America isn’t free, 5-20% stays right here at the Western Union.
Does job growth occur on a 1 for 1 basis in lock-step fashion with the growth of the labor pool? Even in periods of high unemployment?
I’d say at very least there’s a time lag, during which the immigrants will undoubtedly cause more problems than they solve.
But as far as illegal [del]immigration[/del] entry is concerned, my main beef is that it’s unfair to all those people waiting patiently in line for their turn to move to the US legally.
No, I don’t see how we’ve agreed on that.
Not in lockstep, no, but you realistically can’t change immigration policy, or create new enforcement initiatives, in tune with the unemployment rate; the former takes far longer to change than the latter changes on its own. If you decided to start changing policy now the economy will have improved by the time your changes start having an effect.
You say there’s a time lag “during which the immigrants will undoubtedly cause more problems than they solve.” But immigration isn’t a one time thing; it’s a yearly flow. Every year brings first year immigrants, but it also means the people who immigrated five years ago are really getting into the swing of producing wealth. In some cases immigrants come in during periods of high unemployment, but they also come in during periods of LOW unemployment; it tends to balance out.
Again, I must point out that the logical conclusions of the myth “immigrants take our jobs” do not happen. Were it true, almost nobody in the United States would have a job, since the number fo immigrants brought in over the years is a huge portion of the total number of jobs. Unemployment in the United States would have been amazingly, higher-than-the-Depression-high during the immigration wave at the turn of the 19th/20th century. Unemployment would never go down, only up. Areas within the USA where internal migrants flow to would have the country’s highest unemployment rates. Canada, Israel and Australia would have incredibly high unemployment rates as compared to the USA, owing to their much higher percentage of immigrants. But none of those things happen. Why is that?
It’s good for certain business owners, who may have political influence, which is an entirely different proposition than saying it’s good for the national economy, or the average citizen.
From my point of view, the problem is not immigrants per se, but specifically illegal immigrants. Not because they’re cheating by jumping the line, nor because they’re particularly criminal, but because their illegal status allows them to be exploited. The availability of any exploitable underclass of workers depresses wages for all workers in comparable industries.
Then please walk me though how it’s PRECISELY offset when many of the dollars go overseas, and may come back to this country as payments on interest. Dollars earned by people whose families all live here stay in this country and buy local good and services.
How can you claim the two are precisely equal?
I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t really understand the economics of immigration, legal or not, nor do I have any issues with a wide open welcome policy. But I do notice that these days you can’t seem to get even a simple receptionist job without a BA on your resume, nor can an unskilled US citizen get a crap job anymore.
Now I don’t remember this being the deal way back when I entered the work force. What I do remember is that my high school pals all had fast food jobs and plenty of people made a living wage without a college degree.
Now you can’t order lunch at the counter in my neighborhood without at least a little spanish (which is fine, I know enough to order a meal) and there’s no way a high school kid could ever get a McJob because they only hire mexicans to ask if you want fries with that these days.
So what I’m wondering is this: is it possible that it’s a myth that illegal immigrants are only taking jobs that no one else wants? Maybe we could kid ourselves back when the jobs in question were picking beans in the field, but I think now the field has expanded into what were traditionally teen or new grad jobs, and plenty of people want those, right?
So if I’m right, then they are taking jobs from legal citizens who want them.
Cheap labor, in those days, was a boon. In modern times its a drag. The US isn’t going to re-emerge as a factory paradise in the near future and the longer we keep production here, the longer that excess cost is being spent on maintaining a dying industry. This is just as true of food production or any other non-skilled labor sort of job.
Where we would benefit with cheap labor is skilled cheap labor, like scientists and engineers from India and China (or even Mexico, really). But the modern world just doesn’t need uneducated grunts anymore. Or if we do, we have enough with just home-raised Americans. Importing foreign unskilled labor just puts our own unskilled labor out of work because they’re competing for jobs in a shrinking marketplace and the people who have to play by the rules can’t compete.
You just wrote, right there, that the dollars come back. See, that’s the thing.
Following the dollars is missing the point entirely. The value of workers is the creation of wealth, which is done through work - not the allocation of currency, which will inevitably return to the USA in the form of a payment for one service or another. Sending currency overseas decreases domestic demand, but increases foreign demand for U.S. goods and services.
first, who gives a shit about teens, really? it’s better to the economy that as many family units are given the jobs. the teens can sop up the excess shit jobs just so they can buy their shiny, new toy. (frankly, i would outlaw employment for those under 18 so they can focus on studying, but no matter)
most mcjobs i’ve run across don’t have “overwhelmingly” hispanic workers. Many BKs and Mickey-Dees i’ve been to have as many black and white workers. what is common among them all, however, is that they all occupy the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum. which is disproportionately predominated by hispanics, blacks, and meth mouth white folk.
the wider issue you speak of is whether our economy can function, or should we try to make it function, by giving living wages to everyone engaged in unskilled labor. i don’t really know the answer to that.
but i do suspect that you won’t find many uneducated white people willing to dig ditches for 8 hours a day for 8 bucks an hour who aren’t already doing it. sure, they’ll gladly do it for 20 bucks an hour with union benefits, but i’m not sure given the way our economy works (i.e. lowest prices possible and thus the lowest wages possible, so that the top can soak up the excesses) that’s a long-term viable strategy.
I definitely think that’s a myth, encouraged by the people who profit by employing illegal immigrants.
I think citizens (or legal residents) should be picking the beans, too.
it’s not just willingness, though (which I would debate).
Now, I may be talking out of my ass here, but I think there is historical precedence to the notion that newer immigrant groups (obviously, provisos here about group stereotypes) have a far greater propensity to be extremely diligent and hard working, when compared to their native bretheren. I think the italian-american immigration in the 20th C was the same - they came in droves, were extremely hard workers who showed up on time and didn’t complain much, and displaced the native residents who had a more libertine attitude to work. why? not because they were better workers, but they came from an economically strained society so they really didn’t have a choice.
now i’m not saying that workers need to work at breakneck pace without stop for the benefit of the boss man, (in fact i would advocate for the libertine approach) but i am suggesting that employers would most probably have a strong preference between the two.
well, then you’ve missed my whole point, which is that we’re kidding ourselves if we’re pretending that it’s really all about digging ditches for $8/hr. I say it’s not, it’s about any and almost all jobs that are low skill. Even the ones that some white guy actually does want.
no, i didn’t miss your point.
if there was a plentiful supply of domestic labor which was as dependable and industrious as illegal immigrant labor, which was willing to work at the wages that illegal immigrants are willing to work at, then illegal immigration wouldn’t be as big an issue.
think about it from the other side: why are there tons of illegals pouring over every day? do they say to themselves “gee, let’s go illegally hop over this fence to be just as unemployed and just as desperate to work as we are in this country, except we’ll be inserting ourselves into an alien culture where if we get caught in the most minor of slip ups, we will have our entire life that we are trying to build uprooted and destroyed” no. so clearly there has to be a large, unmet demand for their unskilled-but-dependable labor.
before we talk about slave wages, and how they undercut the minimum wage and thus further hinder legal labor from obtaining employment, let’s not get too ahead of ourselves. $7.25 at 40 hours a week is about $290 a week, $1160 a month (and approximately the poverty level for a family of 2). They can’t be taking wages much less than this (assuming that employers are even interested in further breaking the law by not paying them properly) because at $1160 a month, you’re probably barely able to make rent, make a car payment (or save up for one), pay for gas, buy groceries, and then send some money back to mexico every week. so i’m not even sure they’re getting paid severely below market rate, anyways.
Yes, it does – but since some of that foreign transation action is the paying down of debt, it’s not contributing to wealth generation in the same way that direct payments for goods and services are. In any event, they are not PRECISELY EQUAL.
Are they?
If they are, then please illustrate the method by which they are precisely equal, instead of just denying that they’re not or repeating that they are.
well, I think there is a plentiful supply of domestic labor, or there would be if they could get off the unemployment line or welfare rolls, which they can’t, because the jobs they are qualified for go to illegal immigrants.
I think what there is a market for is not unskilled but dependable labor, but a solidly un-mobile lower class who will accept sickeningly low wages and poor working conditions.
And maybe that’s fine with you but it’s not fine with me. As far as I’m concerned every undocumented worker who accepts crap pay and shit conditions makes it harder for a legal citizen without a college degree to make a living.
And sure, for them it’s clearly better to have a sucky life in the US than to starve and die in Mexico, but the solution for that is economic and social assistance to Mexico, it’s not supporting illegal workers here in the US.
You may want to read this article: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/29/1603473/why-dont-they-come-legally-they.html
Re: the jobs that Americans don’t want…Maybe we would want them if we didn’t have to search for jobs with really good benifits (like health insurance) I remember being in Ireland many years ago. we met a guy who was going to be a farmhand. He already had health insurance and so didn’t need to worry about getting a job with good health insurance benifits.
For all practical intents, yup, same thing. Paying off debt, in the long run, is as important as buying Cheetos. The U.S. government can’t function without debt servicing and people would not be well served by the government not functioning.
The total remittances to Mexico in 2008 from all countries was $25 billion. (The portion that was from U.S. can be regarded as “imported labor”.) Note also that there are remittances to the U.S.A. by high-paid expats.
Those concerned about U.S. payment and trade deficit, might be better off focusing on this statistic:
The U.S. trade deficit with China was almost $270 billion in 2008.
While Mr. Dastardly may be exaggerating, it certainly is true that American businesses, whose Greed is Good philosophy is worshipped by the same right-wing idiots worried about immigration, are surely delighted by cheap labor. The public outcry against immigration keeps illegal wages low, also benefitting the same corporations whose funding of right-wing media confuses Americans about the economic truths of immigration.