FOX says Mexicans in the US do the work blacks don't want.......

[Drake Tungsten]

Yeah -- overseeing the regulation of something as frivulous and non-essential as production of food is certainly not important.

You're from Iowa. I expect you to understand how pointless the Secretary of Agriculture's job is, even if I don't expect the same from a city boy like Boris. It's certainly not a vital post like Secretary of State or Defense...

Now you've been caught dissembling. You originally said they weren't "real" positions of responsibility, but then tried to claim you said they just weren't as important.

No, I said they are positions without "real responsibility." A position can still have some importance even if it lacks real responsiblity, so I fail to see what you're getting at besides trying (and failing) again to put words in my mouth...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
No, I said they are positions without "real responsibility." A position can still have some importance even if it lacks real responsiblity, so I fail to see what you're getting at besides trying (and failing) again to put words in my mouth...

Ahem, I'll even bold it for you:

Please note that I said "important posts".

And later

I don't see how it's a cheap shot to point out that the Surgeon General is a little less important than the Secretary of State.

"Little less" wasn't present in your first statement, which was saying that the posts aren't important.

BTW, Surgeon General isn't a cabinet post.

At any rate, I find it rather improbable that you could really believe that ALL those posts listed were not important or even that they lack real responsibility. What a profoundly stupid thing to say.

[Master Zen]

guess Cagliastia chickened out...

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Master Zen
...anti-immigrationists...
-MZ

So there are only 2 positions, no immigration or no borders. good to know.

The benefit of immigration is that the immigrant will integrate and assimilate into your culture, this is not a given. Scaling back the numbers both improves the chances of this happening, and reduces and mitigates the costs caused by immigration.

[Drake Tungsten]

At any rate, I find it rather improbable that you could really believe that ALL those posts listed were not important or even that they lack real responsibility. What a profoundly stupid thing to say.

You know what they say about arguing with idiots, don't they? Seems I should have listened to my mother...

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Whoha

So there are only 2 positions, no immigration or no borders. good to know.

The benefit of immigration is that the immigrant will integrate and assimilate into your culture, this is not a given. Scaling back the numbers both improves the chances of this happening, and reduces and mitigates the costs caused by immigration.

You have a brilliant idea on how to achieve that Sherlock?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by JohnT
How so? One guy has to pay taxes on $700,000 of income which will bring in more than 20 guys paying taxes on $35,000 each.

That is true. The problem is the majority of illegals work in a cash economy where employers keep them off the books and pay them cash at the end of the day. There have been well publizied studies showing this.

For me it is a law and order issue where the government either needs to enforce the law or change the law but allowing companies and workers to just ignore the law is not good. There is also the added problem that many illegals get victimized by unethical businessmen yet they have few legal rights since they are undocumented. If the economy needs these workers then the government should increase visas to meet the demand but this game of passing laws to keep voters happy then making sure no one enforces the law to keep businesses happy is not a good solution.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Master Zen


You still have not proved that the cost of immigration is bigger than the benefit.

The claim made, which is widely publized here in the border area, that illegal immigrants use more services then they pay in taxes not legal immigrants. This is partially because the people work for such low wages the the amount of taxes paid is small (this is also true for citizens who have low wage jobs) and partially it is true because so many illegals work for cash under the table and so do not pay taxes.

Either way we need to find a way to transition people from undocumented to documented workers and we need to drastically increase law enforcement to control smuggling (both of drugs and of people) and to catch companies which abuse workers and/or break wage/tax/working condition laws.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The claim made, which is widely publized here in the border area, that illegal immigrants use more services then they pay in taxes not legal immigrants. This is partially because the people work for such low wages the the amount of taxes paid is small (this is also true for citizens who have low wage jobs) and partially it is true because so many illegals work for cash under the table and so do not pay taxes.

If you read my post at the end of the last page you'd see why exactly most of those claims are false in the long run.

[Ted Striker]

Whoha often mentions the Braceros program as an example of Mexican workers coming in on temporary passes to do agricultural work in the US. What he never mentions is how much money the Braceros would spend when they came to work in Texas. This is well documented. The Braceros did hard field work all day so of course needed alot of food to sustain themselves. They spent this money in the immediately surrounding areas of the communities that they worked in.

[Ted Striker]

Alot of this anti-immigrant HYSTERIA is in the same spirit as the urban legend welfare mothers who were having babies to get an extra check in the mail every month. "OMG teh black welfare mom is stealing all our money!!!!"

Poor people always get scapegoated.

[Dinner]

Yes, I read it and it is interesting. The bottom line is no government on Earth is happy about people not paying taxes. Companies which hire workers "off the books" and who pay them in cash don't pay the taxes they're supposed to and workers who are paid in cash also do not pay the taxes they owe. The result in an underground economy which economically benifets a number of people but it doesn't benifet the state nor pay for things like schools, health care, etc...

You are right that in the long run there are economic pay backs, however, it is hard to convince a city mayor to wait 10-20 years for the payback when the bills have to be paid today.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Master Zen
What I find most misleading about the arguments of the anti-immigrationists is how they present their data solely as an immediate cost-benefit scenario and never as an inter-generational issue. This would be akin to refusing an investment on the grounds that it will not pay itself off immediately. Precisely because of this, I think the big mistake these people make (deliberately of course) is that they choose to view the issue as a cost, not as an investment.

Let's put it this way. From a purely immediate cost-benefit analysis, the cost of illiegal immigration regarding public services like education and health might very well be higher (though not significantly so) than the immediate benefit of consumer cost reduction and producer benefits.

The deficit in this equation is minimal. Most studies I've read show it at about 1% of the total federal budget deficit, in other words, hardly the main culprit of the deficit (blame defense for having the biggest budget burden... oh wait, Righties never blame defense).

Now we look upon this form another perspective: an intergenerational point of view. By law, any children born in the US are legal citizens. Thus, the ensuing offspring of an immigrant family will be legal citizens. They produce a net gain to the economy since they are legally obtaining public services and are contributing to the economy with higher wages than their illegal parents, and consuming a much higher proportion of that wage, both relatively and absolutely in the US economy. Morseo most studies show that 2nd generation immigrants are far less likely to send back money to their country of origin or if they do, in far lesser amounts. The economy has therefore gained a new productive citizen which was not tabulated into the cost-benefit analysis because it was limited to a single-generational model. Even children who obtained education illegaly benefit the country since the positive marginal effect of each extra year of education reflects itself in their expected wages and these children have much better opportunites at eventually becoming legal citizens.

Last but not least you have the opportunity cost which NO anti-immigrationist will ever dare mention. What is this? Take adult immigrants, and even most underage ones. Practically all of them have obtained some degree of education, very likely a primary one and perhaps a few years of secondary. Let's just leave it at primary here. These people are working in the US, benefiting the US economy as consumers, yet the US didn't pay a cent for their education, Mexico did. Why isn't therefore, the opportunity cost of getting people in the country with free education ever tabulated in immigration cost-benefit analysis? Because it suddenly swings the balance into a benefit.

How you like them apples?

-MZ

You think the growth of the recipient class will somehow lead to economic solvency in the long run? Pure fantasy.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Master Zen
guess Cagliastia chickened out...

It's called "having a life outside of online forums".

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Yes, I read it and it is interesting. The bottom line is no government on Earth is happy about people not paying taxes. Companies which hire workers "off the books" and who pay them in cash don't pay the taxes they're supposed to and workers who are paid in cash also do not pay the taxes they owe. The result in an underground economy which economically benifets a number of people but it doesn't benifet the state nor pay for things like schools, health care, etc...

You are right that in the long run there are economic pay backs, however, it is hard to convince a city mayor to wait 10-20 years for the payback when the bills have to be paid today.

I agree, and you bring up a valid argument not over if immigration is good or bad, but over if current government policy is good or bad. In this respect, I do believe there is a lot of room for improvement so that the benefits of immigration are reflected in the short term.