|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:11 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Show me the studies.
|
Sorry, mises, but your credibility on the immigration issue was blown two or three incarnations ago (BJ...etc.). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Why? I'm in favor of immigration from non-muslim states. I'd just like these discussions to not be dominated by platitudes wrapped in bullshit. She said that there are studies, and I asked for them in addition to posting an article refuting her claim written by the former gov of Colorado. Seems reasonable to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ReeseDog
Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: Classified
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| traxxe wrote: |
| Quote: |
Go hug a tree, pinko. Save the indignation for your bleeding-heart rallies.
They're illegal. The shouldn't be here. They need to go home.
Yeah, I guess my family was fleeing for something better when they crossed the land bridge. The difference? Nobody was here when my ancestors arrived, so take that smugness and shove it up your ass. |
I'm hardly a pinko. Don't like communism. I don't hug trees, I eat meat and hunt. I've shot elk and deer in and around Prescott and Payson. I've skinned them, gutted em', and used them for sustenance and trophy.
You're one of those land bridge people when it suits you I bet. I'm pretty sure you are not a registered card carrying native American. I doubt you are even half. Just because your left nut is Navajo still does not justify any of your argument you cork-screwed, uptight, ignoramous. I am a card carrying person who has partial native American descent (25%) but that doesn't make me entitled to be a elistist racist hinting jackass. Nor does it entitle you.
So where is your family really from? You immigrant. I'm guessing not from Mexico.
They are illegal, yes. That doesn't make you any less of a sniveling ignorant retard who tosses out his 'big-toe' equivelant Indian card at the drop of a racism looking hat.
Regardless, I'll buy you a beer and a cheese crisp should I ever see you on the Sonora side of the big dry. |
'Bout 3/4 Native, have no doubt.
I'll buy the beer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Okay, here are some facts about Immigration. My source is Aleinikoff's Immigration and Citizenship Process and Policy 6th Edition. Yes, its a textbook, but I'm putting them in my notes anyway, so might as well cut and past them here. Note that most of these facts relate to LEGAL immigrants.
| Quote: |
The National Research Council (NRC) in 1997 emphasized that the main beneficiaries of immigration are the immigrants - who earn higher wages - followed by their US employers.
Legal and illegal immigration boosted the GDP - between $1 billion and $10 billion in the mid-1990s in an $8 trillion US economy.
Most analysts believe that immigrants pay more in taxes than they consume in tax-supported benefits because most are young and in their working years (Smith & Edmonston, the New Americans)
The Federal gov't tends to benefit from immigration, even for low-earners, but state and local gov'ts may not. Young and low-earning immigrants thus pay most of their taxes to the federal gov't, but consume services disproportionately funded by state and local taxes, including education for their children.
The NRC estimated that California (CA) households headed by Latin American immigrants received an average of $5,000 more in federal, state, and local services than they paid in taxes in 1996, largely because they had low incomes (and thus paid lower taxes) and had more children attending public schools than other households. CA households headed by US born persons paid $2,700 more in federal taxes than they received in federal benefits, while immigrants had exactly the opposite fiscal balance - they received $2,700 mroe in federal benefits than they paid in federal taxes. If these fiscal-balance estimates are applied to the entire US population, the 89 million households headed by a US born person paid an extra $200 each in 1996 to cover the gap between taxes paid and services consumed by 9 million immigrant-headed households, an immigrant deficit of $15 billion to $20 billion.
Immigrants with more than a HS diploma make a lifetime contribution of $105k, and if the benefits from their children are included, a benefit for the US of $198k. However, immigrants with less than a HS diploma impose a lifetime cost of $89,000 and, even with the gain of $76,000 from their children, the net effect is a $13,000 loss. The NRC concluded: "If the policy goal were to maximize the positive contribution of immigration to public sector budgets, that could be achieved by policies favoring highly educated immigrants and not admitting immigrants over age 50." |
But what about immigrants' effects on reducing the dependency ratio?
Phillip Martin and Elizabeth Midgley, Immigration: Shaping and Reshaping America
| Quote: |
Immigration will not prevent the increase in the dependency ratio, the ratio of working-age Americans to the young and especially older Americans.
The US median age, 35 in 2000, was projected by the Census Bureau to rise to 39 by 2030 even with projected net immigration of close to 1 million people annually. Given the US age structure in 2000, each 100 people of working age, defined as ages 20 to 64, would need to support about 21 people age 65 or older. Because the population is growing older, 100 working-age people must support 36 people by 2030. While immigration may slow this process, the dependency ratio will continue to increase. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Regarding the dependency ratio, McKinsey Global Institute found that immigration would actually make the situation worse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TexasPete
Joined: 24 May 2006
Location: Koreatown
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ReeseDog wrote: |
| traxxe wrote: |
| Quote: |
Go hug a tree, pinko. Save the indignation for your bleeding-heart rallies.
They're illegal. The shouldn't be here. They need to go home.
Yeah, I guess my family was fleeing for something better when they crossed the land bridge. The difference? Nobody was here when my ancestors arrived, so take that smugness and shove it up your ass. |
I'm hardly a pinko. Don't like communism. I don't hug trees, I eat meat and hunt. I've shot elk and deer in and around Prescott and Payson. I've skinned them, gutted em', and used them for sustenance and trophy.
You're one of those land bridge people when it suits you I bet. I'm pretty sure you are not a registered card carrying native American. I doubt you are even half. Just because your left nut is Navajo still does not justify any of your argument you cork-screwed, uptight, ignoramous. I am a card carrying person who has partial native American descent (25%) but that doesn't make me entitled to be a elistist racist hinting jackass. Nor does it entitle you.
So where is your family really from? You immigrant. I'm guessing not from Mexico.
They are illegal, yes. That doesn't make you any less of a sniveling ignorant retard who tosses out his 'big-toe' equivelant Indian card at the drop of a racism looking hat.
Regardless, I'll buy you a beer and a cheese crisp should I ever see you on the Sonora side of the big dry. |
'Bout 3/4 Native, have no doubt.
I'll buy the beer. |
Hey, cool it with the alcohol. You know that's how the white man took all your land. Well that, superior numbers, resistance to disease, wiping their a$$ with treaties made in good faith, forced sterilization programs, Wounded Knee (1&2), systemic erosion and eradication of native culture, etc, etc... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cornfed
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| VanIslander wrote: |
"Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free"
Economists have been saying for decades that America needs a more open immigration policy, that there are not enough immigrants to keep the economy going strong. |
Of course they are saying this. They are directly or indirectly employed by the elite who benefit from immigration as it drives down wages, renders average workers expendable and reduces social cohesion so that no-one can stand up to them. This is why the witch-doctors of the state religion can be relied upon to support mass third-world immigration, even though it has been a predictable and obvious disaster everywhere it has been tried. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TexasPete
Joined: 24 May 2006
Location: Koreatown
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cornfed wrote: |
| VanIslander wrote: |
"Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free"
Economists have been saying for decades that America needs a more open immigration policy, that there are not enough immigrants to keep the economy going strong. |
Of course they are saying this. They are directly or indirectly employed by the elite who benefit from immigration as it drives down wages, renders average workers expendable and reduces social cohesion so that no-one can stand up to them. This is why the witch-doctors of the state religion can be relied upon to support mass third-world immigration, even though it has been a predictable and obvious disaster everywhere it has been tried. |
I wonder how much money California fruits and vegetables would cost if they had to employ legal residents/American citizens at state or federal minimum wage or even more? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TexasPete wrote: |
| Cornfed wrote: |
| VanIslander wrote: |
"Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free"
Economists have been saying for decades that America needs a more open immigration policy, that there are not enough immigrants to keep the economy going strong. |
Of course they are saying this. They are directly or indirectly employed by the elite who benefit from immigration as it drives down wages, renders average workers expendable and reduces social cohesion so that no-one can stand up to them. This is why the witch-doctors of the state religion can be relied upon to support mass third-world immigration, even though it has been a predictable and obvious disaster everywhere it has been tried. |
I wonder how much money California fruits and vegetables would cost if they had to employ legal residents/American citizens at state or federal minimum wage or even more? |
They would be more expensive. The Mexicans should have a clear and fair visa process to be able to work legally. And the firm employing them must pay minimum wage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TexasPete
Joined: 24 May 2006
Location: Koreatown
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| TexasPete wrote: |
| Cornfed wrote: |
| VanIslander wrote: |
"Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free"
Economists have been saying for decades that America needs a more open immigration policy, that there are not enough immigrants to keep the economy going strong. |
Of course they are saying this. They are directly or indirectly employed by the elite who benefit from immigration as it drives down wages, renders average workers expendable and reduces social cohesion so that no-one can stand up to them. This is why the witch-doctors of the state religion can be relied upon to support mass third-world immigration, even though it has been a predictable and obvious disaster everywhere it has been tried. |
I wonder how much money California fruits and vegetables would cost if they had to employ legal residents/American citizens at state or federal minimum wage or even more? |
They would be more expensive. The Mexicans should have a clear and fair visa process to be able to work legally. And the firm employing them must pay minimum wage. |
I can understand why people would balk at changing the rules and making things easier or legal for migrant workers to do jobs or come to America, but the alternative of rounding up 11+ million people and deporting them is both unfeasible and unfair to their dependents who are in many cases natural born citizens of the US. Anyone born in the US is by law an American--whether the law should be changed is debatable--but it is the law as it stands now. Forcibly deporting US citizens because of what their parents have done just ain't right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| TexasPete wrote: |
| Cornfed wrote: |
| VanIslander wrote: |
"Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free"
Economists have been saying for decades that America needs a more open immigration policy, that there are not enough immigrants to keep the economy going strong. |
Of course they are saying this. They are directly or indirectly employed by the elite who benefit from immigration as it drives down wages, renders average workers expendable and reduces social cohesion so that no-one can stand up to them. This is why the witch-doctors of the state religion can be relied upon to support mass third-world immigration, even though it has been a predictable and obvious disaster everywhere it has been tried. |
I wonder how much money California fruits and vegetables would cost if they had to employ legal residents/American citizens at state or federal minimum wage or even more? |
They would be more expensive. The Mexicans should have a clear and fair visa process to be able to work legally. And the firm employing them must pay minimum wage. |
What's critical is Mexicans need labor mobility. They need to be able to reject a job based on low-pay and poor working conditions without violating the terms of their visa. Otherwise, we're just carving jobs that Americans cannot compete with.
On a side note: the only illegal immigrants are those running North within a mile of the border. There's no statutory provision providing criminal penalties or even labeling undocumented workers with a criminal status within the INA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| traxxe wrote: |
Pretty amazing response there ReeseDog. Utterly insensitive and bordering on racist with the Pedro comment. I'm assuming you are from Arizona like I am. That's a shame, I hate it when my state's idiots pop out of the woodwork and insult common things attributed to humanity like empathy.
So Mexicans come across the border. Why? There lives are not great in Mexico and they want better lives for themselves and their families. Let's be honest, legal immigration is a joke and never works for even the most patient and deserving of people.
So they come to America. Just because you were born into a country with freedoms and opportunity should not blind you to the plights of others. You are no more deserving to be American than any illegal immigrant.
Let's face it, at one point your family was a "Pedro" too amigo. Get your head out of your ass and realize your family left someplace for a better opportunity. Does it suck we foot a lot of the bill? Yes. I'd rather foot the bill in America than sweat and work for little food in Mexico. Be thankful for your opportunity and the sweat of your immigrant roots that enabled you to be so fucking smug and contempt to a people wanting a better life for themselves.
Peace |
Add to that the irony of everything from Texas to California, including Arizona, having been stolen from Mexico to begin with! Now to resent them for being "illegal" in what was once their country.
And he is wrong about the 'freeloading" part, too. Studies have shown that while paying taxes, they use government services at a lesser rate. |
You forgot the part where the Mexicans stole Mexico from Spain. Mexico belonged to Spain and before that it belonged to the Aztecs. Texas and California didn't belong to an independent Mexico for more than a few decades, if you think about it. Why didn't you mention that?
I am for legal Mexican immigration. Why should a friend who came from Syria who is secular, educated, hard-working, and has been here for 15 years or so not have citizenship and these guys get free passes. Is that really fair? The same with people I've known from Germany and other countries.
Mexicans don't use services that much, I may concede that, but their parents cannot often speak English well, and the school drop out rate is 50%. That's unbearable for the school districts. Don't underestimate how many of them drop out. 50% is a huge number.
It is around that figure, and you don't think there is a cost to bear for that?
Granted, I think most of them are lovely people, I love the food, the women are nice, the men are often very hard-working, but if you don't control immigration, things become too problematic. What's wrong with being legal?
Much of America used to belong England, should it mean people from England are entitled to come here illegaly? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cornfed
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TexasPete wrote: |
| I can understand why people would balk at changing the rules and making things easier or legal for migrant workers to do jobs or come to America, but the alternative of rounding up 11+ million people and deporting them is both unfeasible and unfair to their dependents who are in many cases natural born citizens of the US. |
There wouldn't be any need to round them up. Just deny them any government services and fine anyone employing them, say, $100k with half to go to whoever snitches on them and most of them will deport themselves. As to the supposed unfairness, screw them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cornfed
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| You forgot the part where the Mexicans stole Mexico from Spain. Mexico belonged to Spain and before that it belonged to the Aztecs. |
To be fair, most of the Latinos immigrating to America and the dregs of their societies and are therefore of mostly Indio descent. Hence if the idea of mass immigration is to allow the natives to strike back against the hated white oppressors, then I suppose this makes a certain amount of sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
desultude
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| traxxe wrote: |
Pretty amazing response there ReeseDog. Utterly insensitive and bordering on racist with the Pedro comment. I'm assuming you are from Arizona like I am. That's a shame, I hate it when my state's idiots pop out of the woodwork and insult common things attributed to humanity like empathy.
So Mexicans come across the border. Why? There lives are not great in Mexico and they want better lives for themselves and their families. Let's be honest, legal immigration is a joke and never works for even the most patient and deserving of people.
So they come to America. Just because you were born into a country with freedoms and opportunity should not blind you to the plights of others. You are no more deserving to be American than any illegal immigrant.
Let's face it, at one point your family was a "Pedro" too amigo. Get your head out of your ass and realize your family left someplace for a better opportunity. Does it suck we foot a lot of the bill? Yes. I'd rather foot the bill in America than sweat and work for little food in Mexico. Be thankful for your opportunity and the sweat of your immigrant roots that enabled you to be so fucking smug and contempt to a people wanting a better life for themselves.
Peace |
Add to that the irony of everything from Texas to California, including Arizona, having been stolen from Mexico to begin with! Now to resent them for being "illegal" in what was once their country.
And he is wrong about the 'freeloading" part, too. Studies have shown that while paying taxes, they use government services at a lesser rate. |
You forgot the part where the Mexicans stole Mexico from Spain. Mexico belonged to Spain and before that it belonged to the Aztecs. Texas and California didn't belong to an independent Mexico for more than a few decades, if you think about it. Why didn't you mention that?
I am for legal Mexican immigration. Why should a friend who came from Syria who is secular, educated, hard-working, and has been here for 15 years or so not have citizenship and these guys get free passes. Is that really fair? The same with people I've known from Germany and other countries.
Mexicans don't use services that much, I may concede that, but their parents cannot often speak English well, and the school drop out rate is 50%. That's unbearable for the school districts. Don't underestimate how many of them drop out. 50% is a huge number.
It is around that figure, and you don't think there is a cost to bear for that?
Granted, I think most of them are lovely people, I love the food, the women are nice, the men are often very hard-working, but if you don't control immigration, things become too problematic. What's wrong with being legal?
Much of America used to belong England, should it mean people from England are entitled to come here illegaly? |
Mexicans stole Mexico?!?!?
It "belonged" to Spain?!?!
Explain this logic to the supporters of Israel.
By the way, in some European countries- Ireland and Germany come immediately to mind- if you can prove certain family ties, you can return from the US and claim legal status.
My basic argument on immigration is this-
In a free market economy, both capital and labor must be free to travel and choose which situation suits them best. Free market supporters (I think the same free market supporters who are supporting the $700 billion socialist bailout for Wall Street) seem to have missed this point. Free capital, free labor, open markets. This is the bedrock of market capitalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
