Liberal & Conservative Think Tanks Agree on The Net Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration

[usmbguest5318]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' making efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

 

[usmbguest5318]

....Yet spend that money to stop or curtail illegal immigration is what Trump wants to do and what he's gotten his base all fired up about. What good businessperson spends money to fix a "problem" that's making money for them?

 

[emilynghiem]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

Dear Xelor
And CANCER is a big business that makes more money.
And drug addiction yields tons of money for people profiting off drug
wars as well as drug abuse.

Does that mean we want to ENCOURAGE these things?

How much MORE money could we make off
SOLUTIONS to
* cancer
* drug abuse and addiction
* illegal drug and human trafficking
* curing criminal illness, teaching respect for law and order,
and PREVENTING crime, abuse, violence, etc .
that MAKES SO MUCH MONEY OFF CRIME AND DRUGS.

Couldn't the billions we spend on crime and incarceration
ALREADY pay for health care and medical education for
doctors and nurses for the same cost as warehousing people in prisons?

Schwarzenegger: Build prisons in Mexico
^ While Schwarzenegger was Gov of CA, he advocated
alternatives instead of imprisoning Mexican Nationals that
cost the state of CA alone an est. $1 billion annually.

In HOUSTON used as a hub, human trafficking is also
est. to be a BILLION dollar industry.

it makes a lot of money flow through the economy
and pays a lot of police and feds to keep jobs that feed off this demand.

Why can't we take restitution owed for criminal violations and invest those resources in building factories, schools, military teaching hospitals and prisons that correct the problems not make money off them?

Example: www.paceuniversal.com
or www.campusplan.org

What if we developed sustainable campus jobs, services and housing
along the border. Wouldn't THAT generate more sustainable revenue than promoting illegal immigration and criminals that take advantage?

www.earnedamnesty.org

 

[usmbguest5318]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

Dear Xelor
And CANCER is a big business that makes more money. And drug addiction yields tons of money for people profiting off drug wars as well as drug abuse.

Does that mean we want to ENCOURAGE these things?

How much MORE money could we make off
SOLUTIONS to
* cancer
* drug abuse and addiction
* illegal drug and human trafficking
* curing criminal illness, teaching respect for law and order,
and PREVENTING crime, abuse, violence, etc . that MAKES SO MUCH MONEY OFF CRIME AND DRUGS.

Couldn't the billions we spend on crime and incarceration ALREADY pay for health care and medical education for doctors and nurses for the same cost as warehousing people in prisons?

Schwarzenegger: Build prisons in Mexico
^ While Schwarzenegger was Gov of CA, he advocated alternatives instead of imprisoning Mexican Nationals that cost the state of CA alone an est. $1 billion annually.

In HOUSTON used as a hub, human trafficking is also est. to be a BILLION dollar industry.

it makes a lot of money flow through the economy and pays a lot of police and feds to keep jobs that feed off this demand.

Why can't we take restitution owed for criminal violations and invest those resources in building factories, schools, military teaching hospitals and prisons that correct the problems not make money off them?

Example: www.paceuniversal.com or www.campusplan.org

What if we developed sustainable campus jobs, services and housing along the border. Wouldn't THAT generate more sustainable revenue than promoting illegal immigration and criminals that take advantage?

www.earnedamnesty.org

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but I sense that you are advocating that we would pursue an uneconomic approach to "fixing a problem" that doesn't cost anything to leave it alone. The idea of doing that goes against everything Trump has stated he wants to accomplish, among them spending taxpayer money in a more economically efficient way. Hell, Trump isn't even alone in wanting to achieve that outcome. I suspect pretty much everyone wants to see that top-line result come to pass.

 

[Freewill]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' making efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

Was this printed in 1860 concerning the benefits of slavery to the nation? I am quite sure when the slave owners could work the slaves for nothing their profit margin was much higher.

 

[emilynghiem]

....Yet spend that money to stop or curtail illegal immigration is what Trump wants to do and what he's gotten his base all fired up about. What good businessperson spends money to fix a "problem" that's making money for them?

Dear Xelor
the smart forward thinking business developer
would SEE the trend and demand growing for SUSTAINABLE
affordable solutions.

If you KNOW there is a cure for drug abuse and addiction,
and that people are going to WANT that instead of suffering
and paying for crime and death/destruction of health and lives,
then a SMART business would invest in building educational
programs and services that TEACH and PROVIDE those
better means of treating criminal illness and addiction.

Because that's where the market is heading.
And the type of programs in society that can reinvent
public education and service to be self-sustaining.

(Same with investing in cleaner more cost-effective
energy sources and means of production and recycling.
We would start competing to profit more by cutting
costs of waste and problems that are so expensive we can't
afford to fix them and just have to prevent them instead.)

 

[usmbguest5318]

....Yet spend that money to stop or curtail illegal immigration is what Trump wants to do and what he's gotten his base all fired up about. What good businessperson spends money to fix a "problem" that's making money for them?

Dear Xelor
the smart forward thinking business developer
would SEE the trend and demand growing for SUSTAINABLE
affordable solutions.

If you KNOW there is a cure for drug abuse and addiction,
and that people are going to WANT that instead of suffering
and paying for crime and death/destruction of health and lives,
then a SMART business would invest in building educational
programs and services that TEACH and PROVIDE those
better means of treating criminal illness and addiction.

Because that's where the market is heading.
And the type of programs in society that can reinvent
public education and service to be self-sustaining.

(Same with investing in cleaner more cost-effective
energy sources and means of production and recycling.
We would start competing to profit more by cutting
costs of waste and problems that are so expensive we can't
afford to fix them and just have to prevent them instead.)

I understand what you are saying but the point you've made is contextually night-and-day different from that inplay in the matter of illegal immigration and the U.S. government spending taxpayer dollars to "fix" it.

 

[rhodescholar]

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy....

Stopped reading right there, as there was no need to read any further.

The only people claiming that the mass illegal invasion is a "positive" in any way either is paid to do so, or has a vested interest in keeping it going.

The FACT is that it is a financial disaster for the US, especially the middle class taxpayer who subsidizes the illegals, and the working class whose jobs and wage losses to the illegals is well documented. Most illegals work at salaries - assuming they are even on the books - that is WAY too low to provide the taxes to support the massive usage of public services such as public schools, hospitals, etc. There is also a huge and imbalanced percent of convicted felon illegals in prisons who obviously are also net takers in terms of costs.

NYC ALONE spent almost $5 BILLION dollars last year to educate illegal alien children; if you added together ALL of the taxes paid by illegals in NYS you would not even come close to that number.

The "think tanks" (more like corporate america's and the national democratic party's propagands outlets) who spout this utter garbage deserve to be shut down. If undergoing a mass invasion of illegals was such a "good" thing, other countries around the world would be seeking them all the time - but none do, because they know it destroys the jobs and tax base of the country.

This is a problem that needs to be fixed, with all illegals deported and the anchor baby nonsense stopped, and I'm thrilled we have a real president like Trump who is good to his word and actually taking steps to do so.

 

[usmbguest5318]

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy....

Stopped reading right there, as there was no need to read any further.

The only people claiming that the mass illegal invasion is a "positive" in any way either is paid to do so, or has a vested interest in keeping it going.

The FACT is that it is a financial disaster for the US, especially the middle class taxpayer who subsidizes the illegals, and the working class whose jobs and wage losses to the illegals is well documented. Most illegals work at salaries - assuming they are even on the books - that is WAY too low to provide the taxes to support the massive usage of public services such as public schools, hospitals, etc. There is also a huge and imbalanced percent of convicted felon illegals in prisons who obviously are also net takers in terms of costs.

NYC ALONE spent almost $5 BILLION dollars last year to educate illegal alien children; if you added together ALL of the taxes paid by illegals in NYS you would not even come close to that number.

The "think tanks" (more like corporate america's and the national democratic party's propagands outlets) who spout this utter garbage deserve to be shut down. If undergoing a mass invasion of illegals was such a "good" thing, other countries around the world would be seeking them all the time - but none do, because they know it destroys the jobs and tax base of the country.

This is a problem that needs to be fixed, with all illegals deported and the anchor baby nonsense stopped, and I'm thrilled we have a real president like Trump who is good to his word and actually taking steps to do so.

Stopped reading right there, as there was no need to read any further....The FACT is that it is a financial disaster for the US, especially the middle class taxpayer who subsidizes the illegals, and the working class whose jobs and wage losses to the illegals is well documented.

Here is the point to which you claim to have read:

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy.

Actually reading that far would have called for you to click on the linked content and read it. Clearly you didn't; thus you didn't even do what you claimed to have done. What you did was assume you know more about the matter than do the economists at the organizations that published the two reports to which I linked, and by inference, that you know more than the individual who both conservatives and liberals agree is the nations' foremost expert on immigration economics. I know that is what you've done because:

• you raised a point that was addressed qualitatively and quantitatively in the linked documents, yet you've offered nor referred to no comparably rigorous refutation or rebuttal to the findings shown in the linked documents,
• you refer to the two organizations as propaganda outlets, yet they have completely different objectives -- the CIS wants to minimize immigration and the MPI wants to maximize it -- and they are still agreeing on the same set of facts and research findings,
• you aren't even aware that the two reports rely upon and cite the findings from the research of the country's leading immigration economist, research that wasn't performed for propaganda purposes,
• you refer only to costs and ignore gains, thereby focusing on only one side of the picture when clearly the discussion is about the net impact of illegal immigration -- that is, the costs and the gains taken in total and together.

Now I don't really care that you didn't read the document. I care only that you didn't and you deigned to respond/comment on the matter, thereby wasting people's time with your sophistry.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

There is no net benefit to illegal immigration. What are the figures on incarcerated illegals. We do pay for their support. We pay for their legal services.

How about the impact on the victims of illegals, the loss of a spouse or parent. What's the figures on those. Someone whose car is totalled by an illegal drunk driver with no license, how much does he cost.

Jose and Maria each work a minimum wage job. They pay no taxes. They're have five children. They each send a hundred dollars a week to relatives in Mexico.

Since two of their children were born here they are a blended family. The whole family is on medicaid. They get ebt, the children eat three meals a day at school. Once a week they get free food from the pantry. Their rent is only one hundred fifty a month because they are on section 8. All of their utilities are discounted for low income. The government pays their phone bills outright. The phone has only a few minutes so they have 5 phones each.

And you expect me to believe they provide a net positive?

 

[rhodescholar]

Actually reading that far would have called for you to click on the linked content and read it.

You misread my post. I stopped reading yours after the first sentence that I quoted, and read nothing more.

I do not need to read what your links say, I've ALREADY done the research going back DECADES, starting decades AGO.

What you did was assume you know more about the matter than do the economists

Which I clearly do.

both conservatives and liberals agree is the nations' foremost expert on immigration economics.

These 2 groups do not represent all liberals and conservatives on this topic any more than obama represented all blacks. Their opinions, like many such orgs, are bought and paid for. Unlike them, I am without an agenda - I simply use facts.

Facts such as an illegal family with 2 kids in the NYC public school system that regularly uses local hospitals for basic care and who work at jobs that pay a combined $40K per year CANNOT possibly provide a net positive economic benefit for society at large. For their employers who are able to undercut the market if only americans were available as employees, yes - but for everyone else whose taxes are subsidizing their existence in this country, along with the displaced workers whose jobs they've stolen, no the rest of us are definitely NOT benefitting from them being here.

you raised a point that was addressed qualitatively and quantitatively in the linked documents, yet you've offered nor referred to no comparably rigorous refutation or rebuttal to the findings shown in the linked documents,

Sonny boy, you don't know a fucking thing about me or what I've done or not done. I have had detailed discussions with finance professors, economists, think tanks, etc since the early 1980s on this topic - and NO ONE can counter what I wrote above. For the same reason that NO COUNTRY on earth accepts illegals as mentioned above for obvious reasons, the US should not be either.

you refer to the two organizations as propaganda outlets, yet they have completely different objectives -- the CIS wants to minimize immigration and the MPI wants to maximize it -- and they are still agreeing on the same set of facts and research findings,

Whose "economists" would not last 30 seconds in a debate with me. I've heard all of the bullshit before; when it is pointed out that the illegals who work on the books' whole salaries are less than the total public benefits they use, the proponent of illegals shrivels like a fucking wilted flower.

I have no interest nor desire to read some bought-and-paid for asshole spouting corporate america's script, claiming they know something I don't.

you refer only to costs and ignore gains, thereby focusing on only one side of the picture when clearly the discussion is about the net impact of illegal immigration -- that is, the costs and the gains taken in total and together.

The gains are only delivered to the employers and a handful of people who benefit from them being here; the rest of society has to financially subsidize those few.

Perhaps you and your pet economists there can do the math for us: how does a couple whose father works delivering food from a restaurant on a bike making $20K off the books, whose wife is a hotel maid on the books making $25K a year, possibly pay enough in sales taxes and income tax to cover 2 kids in public school that costs $30K annually for each child? Starting to become clearer to you now? How many more fucking times do I need to spell it out for you?

 

[usmbguest5318]

I do not need to read what your links say, I've ALREADY done the research going back DECADES, starting decades AGO.

"economists" would not last 30 seconds in a debate with me.

claiming they know something I don't.

Fine....You have all that knowledge, please do share the figures and calculations that refute the findings in the source study from which those two reports draw, but I'm not going to take your word for the inaccuracy of the facts presented in those two reports it merely because you say they are inaccurate. Back it up....The math supporting the figures I cited is in the reports to which I linked. The methodology that led to those figures is in the source document from which the two reports base their additional commentary, commentary which I didn't mention because I don't care about their commentary, I only care about the empirical data the two reports presented.

One fact of what you've done so far is that you refer only to costs and ignore gains, thereby focusing on only one side of the picture when clearly the discussion is about the net impact of illegal immigration -- that is, the costs and the gains taken in total and together.

I stopped reading yours after the first sentence that I quoted, and read nothing more.

I do not need to read what your links say

how does a couple whose father works delivering food from a restaurant on a bike making $20K off the books, whose wife is a hotel maid on the books making $25K a year, possibly pay enough in sales taxes and income tax to cover 2 kids in public school that costs $30K annually for each child?

You wouldn't ask that question if you'd read the reports or the source study that underpins them, or if you truly were among the country's leading immigration economists and knew what they said, and yet you claim to be an expert. Yeah, you just go with that....

How many more fucking times do I need to spell it out for you?

Providing something as comprehensive and rigorous as the content I linked to in the OP just one time would be sufficient. You have yet to do that.

 

[rhodescholar]

To the OP:

I decided to take a brief look at the CIS paper, and found it contradicts itself repeatedly, and makes other claims that are nonsense. It aso uses citations for its data FROM OTHER BORJAS writings, unlike material from FAIR which uses GOVERNMENT statistics. Here is an example:

"Illegal Immigration: Applying the standard textbook model to illegal immigration shows that illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. As before, this “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives."

Really? No shit that the GDP is larger because more people are in the country consuming, buying etc, but that has NOTHING to do with the net COST to the country to financially support those extra people (illegals) living in it.

"The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP — six one-hundredths of 1 percent."

No fucking idea where he gets that nonsense from (he doesn't use citations) so he might as well be pulling them out of his ass.

"Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal im- migration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for busi- nesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion."

So now he admits that corporations benefit, but low wage workers get fucked? How is that supporting illegal immigration?

"The above estimates are generated by the presence of additional workers in the labor market, not by the legal status of those workers."

So now he's conflagrating legal immigrants with illegals to make a point, what a shock...

In a more recent study by this clown:

Borjas Study Shows Illegal Aliens More Likely To Gain Employment Over Native Workers | NumbersUSA

He admits that illegals are bad for the country...now your OP is DOA. You should never have engaged me on a subject I am way the fuck too informed on. You're out of your league, kid.

 

[rhodescholar]

Back it up....The math supporting the figures I cited is in the reports to which I linked.

He used statistical models, not actual figures. You want facts from an unbiased source, start here:

The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers (2013)

State Cost Studies | Federation for American Immigration Reform

You wouldn't ask that question if you'd read the reports or the source study that underpins them, or if you truly were among the country's leading immigration economists

Oh I get it, because the Fortune 500-loving WSJ claims he is "one of america's leading immigration experts..." that makes his claims legit? Are you fucking for real?

Providing something as comprehensive and rigorous as the content I linked to in the OP just one time would be sufficient. You have yet to do that.

Just did, see above.

 

[oreo]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' making efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

According to this article illegal immigration is a positive 4 trillion dollars to our economy. They buy homes, they buy cars, they buy T.Vs, computers and electronics just like everyone else does. And that's why it's so important to get an immigration reform bill passed through congress to insure that they're paying their fair share in taxes, social security & medicare.

"The U.S. Department of Agriculture states that, “about half of the hired workers employed in U.S. crop agriculture were unauthorized, with the overwhelming majority of these workers coming from Mexico.” The USDA has also warned that, “any potential immigration reform could have significant impacts on the U.S. fruit and vegetable industry.” From the perspective of National Milk Producers Federation in 2009, retail milk prices would increase by 61 percent if its immigrant labor force were to be eliminated.

Echoing the Department of Labor, the USDA, and the National Milk Producers Federation, agricultural labor economist James S. Holt made the following statement to Congress in 2007: “The reality, however, is that if we deported a substantial number of undocumented farm workers, there would be a tremendous labor shortage.”

In terms of overall numbers, The Department of Labor reports that of the 2.5 million farm workers in the U.S., over half (53 percent) are illegal immigrants. Growers and labor unions put this figure at 70 percent.

But what about the immense strain on social services and money spent on welfare for these law breakers? The Congressional Budget Office in 2007 answered this question in the following manner: “Over the past two decades, most efforts to estimate the fiscal impact of immigration in the United States have concluded that, in aggregate and over the long term, tax revenues of all types generated by immigrants—both legal and unauthorized—exceed the cost of the services they use.” According to the New York Times, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration claims that undocumented workers have contributed close to 10% ($300 billion) of the Social Security Trust Fund."
Illegal immigrants benefit the U.S. economy
Undocumented Immigrants Contribute Billions in Taxes

Alabama had to learn this lesson the hard way: They did kick out all illegal immigrants and in came the consequences.
Alabama law drives out illegal immigrants but also has unexpected consequences

 

[BrokeLoser]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' making efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

Haha....I know we often joke around about you people living with your head in your asses and all but your post takes the cake. Not even a tolerant liberal could honestly believe that Mexican illegals yield a positive impact on America in any way whatsoever. Come on man!

 

[Clementine]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' making efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

Was this printed in 1860 concerning the benefits of slavery to the nation? I am quite sure when the slave owners could work the slaves for nothing their profit margin was much higher.

Yes, and while the left wants $15 minimum wage for citizens, they cite the benefit of illegals providing cheap labor for farms. They want their fresh produce to stay reasonable cheap so underpaying illegals is a good thing, as far as they are concerned.

What they don't say is that if all illegals get amnesty or we just open borders so everyone can come in, then everyone will keep demanding higher minimum wages until they make sure that business owners don't make more than the workers.

You always have to look at the endgame when it comes to liberals.

 

[oreo]

Actually reading that far would have called for you to click on the linked content and read it.

You misread my post. I stopped reading yours after the first sentence that I quoted, and read nothing more.

I do not need to read what your links say, I've ALREADY done the research going back DECADES, starting decades AGO.

What you did was assume you know more about the matter than do the economists

Which I clearly do.

both conservatives and liberals agree is the nations' foremost expert on immigration economics.

These 2 groups do not represent all liberals and conservatives on this topic any more than obama represented all blacks. Their opinions, like many such orgs, are bought and paid for. Unlike them, I am without an agenda - I simply use facts.

Facts such as an illegal family with 2 kids in the NYC public school system that regularly uses local hospitals for basic care and who work at jobs that pay a combined $40K per year CANNOT possibly provide a net positive economic benefit for society at large. For their employers who are able to undercut the market if only americans were available as employees, yes - but for everyone else whose taxes are subsidizing their existence in this country, along with the displaced workers whose jobs they've stolen, no the rest of us are definitely NOT benefitting from them being here.

you raised a point that was addressed qualitatively and quantitatively in the linked documents, yet you've offered nor referred to no comparably rigorous refutation or rebuttal to the findings shown in the linked documents,

Sonny boy, you don't know a fucking thing about me or what I've done or not done. I have had detailed discussions with finance professors, economists, think tanks, etc since the early 1980s on this topic - and NO ONE can counter what I wrote above. For the same reason that NO COUNTRY on earth accepts illegals as mentioned above for obvious reasons, the US should not be either.

you refer to the two organizations as propaganda outlets, yet they have completely different objectives -- the CIS wants to minimize immigration and the MPI wants to maximize it -- and they are still agreeing on the same set of facts and research findings,

Whose "economists" would not last 30 seconds in a debate with me. I've heard all of the bullshit before; when it is pointed out that the illegals who work on the books' whole salaries are less than the total public benefits they use, the proponent of illegals shrivels like a fucking wilted flower.

I have no interest nor desire to read some bought-and-paid for asshole spouting corporate america's script, claiming they know something I don't.

you refer only to costs and ignore gains, thereby focusing on only one side of the picture when clearly the discussion is about the net impact of illegal immigration -- that is, the costs and the gains taken in total and together.

The gains are only delivered to the employers and a handful of people who benefit from them being here; the rest of society has to financially subsidize those few.

Perhaps you and your pet economists there can do the math for us: how does a couple whose father works delivering food from a restaurant on a bike making $20K off the books, whose wife is a hotel maid on the books making $25K a year, possibly pay enough in sales taxes and income tax to cover 2 kids in public school that costs $30K annually for each child? Starting to become clearer to you now? How many more fucking times do I need to spell it out for you?

The biggest cost of illegal immigration is education. They are not eligible for WELFARE benefits. Nor can they VOTE. Walking into a voting precinct or a Welfare office, is the ultimate equivalent of a "here I am come and get me moment." Education--we're talking about public schools meaning kids.

They do work, many pay taxes, and they are typically working in low end jobs, that most Americans are not interested in doing.

They tried this in Alabama, and it didn't work. Farmers lost their workers, hotels could find anyone, one chicken place couldn't find workers etc.etc. etc. All you need to do is READ this article and the two above to understand the impact of chasing out all illegals in this country. It would be devasting to this economy.
Alabama law drives out illegal immigrants but also has unexpected consequences

 

[rhodescholar]

The biggest cost of illegal immigration is education.

Uh, so?

They are not eligible for WELFARE benefits.

They collect welfare benefits through their anchor baby children.

Nor can they VOTE.

Many have been caught doing so.

Education--we're talking about public schools meaning kids.

Which means what exactly? That I should pay higher taxes to pay for the children of Honduras to come to my kids' public schools, use their resources, make the classes more crowded - which liberals always like to use an excuse that makes it harder for their pet public union employee teachers?

They do work, many pay taxes, and they are typically working in low end jobs, that most Americans are not interested in doing.

Not even going to waste my time with idiots like this anymore.

Farmers lost their workers, hotels could find anyone, one chicken place couldn't find workers etc.etc. etc.

Guess what, idiot - in Australia they got rid of their seasonal farm workers, and improved their technology to replace them. What an amazing idea!

 

[oreo]

Twice in less than 24 hours I've found myself engaged in discussions about something having to do with the net economic impact of illegal immigration. The same topic also came up about ten days ago. I have thus elevated my post on the matter to the OP of a thread because it seems people here just don't do their own research, in this case, into whether illegal immigration yields a net positive or negative economic impact to the U.S.

According to publications from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies and the liberal Migration Policy Institute, illegal immigration yields a very small but nonetheless positive impact on the U.S. economy. Read the documents you'll find linked in the preceding sentence and you'll find the following:

• Illegal immigrants increased GDP by $395 to $472 billion. This “contribution” to the economy does not measure the net benefit to natives.
• The surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.
• The immigration surplus or benefit to natives created by illegal immigrants is estimated at around $9 billion a year or 0.06 percent of GDP -- six one-hundredths of 1 percent.
• Although the net benefits to natives from illegal immigrants are small, there is a sizable redistribution effect. Illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated $99 to $118 billion a year, and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrants of $107 to $128 billion.

Now one can kvetch about the fact that the net gain is very small, but what one cannot do is credibly claim that illegal immigration is a net drain on the U.S. economy, and that's in the current environment whereby we spend whatever we spend to impede, apprehend and deport individuals' making efforts to illegally gain entry to or remain in the U.S.

In other words, the only way illegal immigration/immigrants can become a net drain on the U.S. economy is if U.S. federal, state and local governments spend more money interdicting and deporting illegal immigrants. How much more? Well, something between $395 and $472 billion more.

I'm sorry, but laws on the books or not -- we've had stupid laws before, we clearly do still -- it just doesn't make sense to spend any sum of money to solve a so-called problem that produces for our country a net gain if we just leave it alone.

Haha....I know we often joke around about you people living with your head in your asses and all but your post takes the cake. Not even a tolerant liberal could honestly believe that Mexican illegals yield a positive impact on America in any way whatsoever. Come on man!

Do they buy American made cars? YES
Do they buy T.V.'s and other electronics? YES
Do they buy food? Yes
Do they buy houses? Yes--in fact 40% own homes in this country.
Do they go to restaurants? Yes
Do they go to the movies? Yes
Do they buy clothes & furniture? Yes

Now remove 11 million of them and see what happens next.