All immigrants. In fact, the "desperate no English group" stand even less of a chance of harming native wages, since they are substitute labor at best for other impoverished immigrants. The studies confirm that. Economic literature is very clear; immigration is most likely helping the economy overall. Are there some groups hurt? Yes. Do some groups (other than the immigrants themselves) benefit? Yes. In the long run, do the benefits outweigh the costs? Yes. Anyways, it's glaringly clear that evidence doesn't convince you as you have pointed all kinds of irrational and vapid "holes" in my peer-reviewed, academic studies, while you post your own assertions based on...what? No one knows. Here, have one for the road...
OK, let me spell this out to you. This whole immigration is a very complex issue, yes, but what I was saying is that these guys don't even understand the some simple basics stuffs that barely touch the surface then it is futile that they can understand the whole situation. What do they not understand? How about the simple fact that the Chinese or anyone else can and will get here by the millions if the border is open.
Here is another simple fact that stares you in the face that you can not understand. So you (and the previous article) say, these new immigrant are substitutes for the recent impoverished immigrants only? For simplicity sake, let's call them the 2nd wave and the 1st wave of immigrants. Ask yourself what will happen to these 1st wave when the 2nd wave takes their jobs? What happens when the 3rd wave gets here? and so on and so forth..
The argument that all immigrants as a whole is beneficial to the US economy today, (even given that it is true), does not lend support to an open border policy. The US is currently allowing people with higher education, engineers, doctors to immigrate. This number, currently, balances with the number of illegal, non-Eng speaking, non-HS education people, and they may produce a positive net gain. Once you open your border, the number of the 1st group does not go up if at all (they are already here) while the number of the 2nd group explodes. Do the math. You talk about inventions/ advance in science ... it only comes from the 1st group. You talk about taxes and rent? The meager amount of taxes the lower income people pay into the pot and the rent from these squalid apartments does not raise the GDP or standard living condition of the nation as a whole. It drags it down. If you have open border policy, you will have millions and millions more of them and all they do is to bring the US closer to the level of a 3rd world country, not higher, and that is the reality of it.
uh... alrighty then. Well, at least I got you to accept that immigration is a net positive, and it's not like America's system is all H1B, top-heavy either.
Wouldn't the waves stop once there were no more jobs? If we were flooded with 100 million people of any race, legal or illegal, wouldn't this hurt our economy temporarily? Not sure why you feel you have to single the Chinese out, as if Chinese immigrants are a dangerous future that we all must be warned about. 100 million people aren't going to immigrate here because after a few million word gets out that there ain't no jobs! Even cheap slave labor, you can't flood the work force with that many people and expect stability in the short term. It seems like this is rage's only argument, that immigration is dangerous when you have 100 million asians coming in from Mexico...
No because it will never come to having a 100 million Chinese going to Mexico. I was just pointing out how unrealistic your hypothetical is. Understand that a completely unrealistic hypothetical is to be taken as a serious argument?
don't shake your head. explain. i made this thread to get your perspective. people have made counter-arguments to your perspective and i have not seen anything to refute their claims from you. illegal immigration is dangerous, but i think there is real evidence to prove that it has benefits. my only concerns with ILLEGAL immigration are that 1) someone dangerous could get into this country without us knowing and 2) though low wages allow for cheaper products, it is unamerican imo. you're taking advantage of desperate people because they are not citizens...we as americans are supposed to be better than that. personally, even though i know it would effect the cost of goods, i dont think we should allow products to be imported if they are produced by someone who does not make a standard living wage. but that is government interference and i dont really care for that either.
I will give you 2 facts and let you chew on them: 1) The US green card lottery system. The US allows 50,000 people in a year and there are 10+ millions people qualify for it. (The number of applicants is higher still but the INS does not release it) 2) World poverty. http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats You only need to read the 1st line: Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day
So, of course, they have the resources to RISE UP, and overwhelm the American borders like zombies with their Google Map, and flying/swimming skills. 100 million at a time.
What does world poverty levels have to do with our immigration policy? 90 percent of those people couldn't sneak into this country if they tried. It takes too much money just to pay someone to get you over the border. If it was legal, they would still have to pay to get to the border. They would also have to pay to find a place to stay. I still find it extremely unrealistic to consider 100,000,000 people coming over here if our borders were open. Didn't we have an open border up until the early 20th century? How many people came over then? The only point you have made is that flooding our workforce with 100,000,000 unqualified workers would be detrimental to our economy and way of life. The point has been refuted by simply stating how unrealistic it is to assume 100 million people could get into our country legally. That would be nearly the entire population of Mexico, and as much as you think every Mexican wants into the US, it's simply not true. As for the green card lottery, to say there are 10+ million who qualify is an understatement. 4 billion people probably "qualify" for it. Only certain countries are exempt and the only other requirement is that you have minimum education. Is your point to say that we already allow 50,000 people in a year? Or is it to say look how many people want into our country? You provide a statistic that shows how despicably poor the rest of the world is and you want to limit immigration? It just shows how terrible things are for people and how badly they need somewhere they can turn to. I thought that's what this country was for? A place for the broken and oppressed. Freedom, liberty, rights, etc. all the things we take for granted, you want to limit the people who qualify for this?
I should make it clear that I don't want illegal immigrants. I just have no problem making all of the illegals citizens. If that means no more slave labor to allow for cheaper products, especially agricultural products, than so be it. Time to stop being so selfish and start practicing what we preach.
When I lot immigration . . . I think of it like Adoption Alot of Pro-IMMIGRATION folx think America is Brad and Angelina The Anti-IMMIGRATION folx think America is The OctoMom The reality is that America is probably more like the Duggars Follow the Analogy If Brad and Angelina decide to adopt another kid . . . no one cares much . . because they have nigh unlimited resources. So if they said they wanted another 10 kids. . . there would only be slight concern The OctoMom decides to adopt another kid . . there would be a collective THAT B**** IS CRAZY! She already on welfare and cannot afford what she has! The Duggars have 19 kids and they seem to be maintaining. . . .IF they decide to adopt a kid . . .it maybe a strain but we could see them doing it . . .if they decided to adopt 10 . . .. we would begin to worry Everyone cannot do Everything An Aside - I notice that when people defend immigration . . . it is usually by throwing the poor under the bus. They will denigrate the American Poor in favor of the 'hard working' immigrant. Which is what I find most distasteful. This is a group that will step on their brother freezing on the ground to give a stranger a coat . . . I guess because they figure the stranger has POTENTIAL . . whereas their brother is just crap and beyond redemption QUESTION: Should we let everyone in that wants to come? Or Everyone that can make it here? If I were . . say . . China . . .and America took on an open board senario . . . I would immediately deport all my prisoners and troublemakers to America . . . easily clearing the financial burden of maintaining a prison system . . . . . This is why an open boarder is ridiculous When debating immigration there are 2 things to consider Social Impact - QUESTION: If say a group of French folx . . move into a town . . say . . uhm . . .Tyler . . .An immediate migration of say . . .1 million [exageration to make a point] . . .then start implementing laws and changes to make tyler more. . uhm . . french [every sign has to be in french . .etc etc . .. ] Is tyler still an American town of a French town in America. America's identity is unique and probably the most elastic identity in the world. . but it has limits. We have the right . .. no . . maybe even the duty to defend that identity Economic Impact - Simply put . . .can we afford them? What happens when to carry the last example a bit further. . . the New French Tylerians decide to only hire people who speak french . . .effectively pushing the generations of Tylerians before them out of the town . . . . Or another group will work for .50$ on the dollar of the jobs those there already have. . . .So people been on the job 30 yrs at 15$ an hour . .. now either have to lose their job or take a pay cut to 7.50$ an hour. This does not even touch on the public services etc. Loosely translated .. . this is not a simple YEA or NAY QUESTION: Would you be oppose to the government assigning immigrants to various areas. This way you would distribute the impact among states? Texas ,Cali, boarder states take the brunt now . . .What if Texas could deport 50% of their immigrant population to say . . montana? Rocket River
