Dreamers contribute to our economy
There is your "evidence". Now, to your points. First remittances. Guess you haven't had an economics course. Those dollars flowing out of the US actually benefit you and the country. Perhaps more importantly, they can be damaging to the receiving country's economy. It is basic economics but feel free to do your own research. There are numerous white papers documenting both the effect of those remittances on the sending and receiving country's economy. But here in the United States it has been shown that those foreign remittances have done more to keep inflation under control than the suppression of the interest rate by the Federal Reserve. Think about it, it is common sense. If those dollars remain here it is more dollars chasing the same amount of goods and the definition of inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods. On the flip side, well in the receiving country there are now more dollars chasing the same amount of goods. Check out Mexico, they had a sixteen year high inflation rate in December of 2017, 6.77%.
Mexico Inflation Rate | 1974-2018 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast
But now, to your study from the Center for Immigration Studies. That is just it, studies from the CIS are consistently debunked by academics, think tanks, and immigration research organizations. They are known for extremist nativist views and are suspected of being little more than an offshoot of white supremacist groups like the KKK. I would advise you not to produce such bullshit in a serious debate. For instance,
- In 2000 the average age of an immigrant was 39, which is actually about four years older than the average age of a native-born American.
- Even focusing on only recent immigration reveals little impact on aging. Excluding all 22 million immigrants who arrived after 1980 from the 2000 Census increases the average age in the United States by only about four months.
I suppose you believe those two statements support your position. Ironically, they do not. The first statements informs you that the average immigrant is actually older than the average native. So when remove those "older" people from the census numbers the average age increases by four months. WTF. And a 39 year old immigrant that arrived in 1980 was 59 in 2000, and he was REMOVED from the numbers. It is not the immigrants that are keeping the average age down, it is their children, as shown here,
This growth has been driven entirely by the increasing numbers of babies born to immigrant women. In 2014, immigrant women accounted for about 901,000 U.S. births, which marked a threefold increase from 1970 when immigrant women accounted for about 274,000 births. Meanwhile, the annual number of births to U.S.-born women dropped by 11% during that same time period, from 3.46 million in 1970 to 3.10 million in 2014
Births Outside of Marriage Decline for Immigrant Women
Did you get that? US birth increases was ENTIRELY driven by immigrants. The impact can be seen here,
Immigrants Are Keeping America Young — And The Economy Growing
Your link source is simply BUNK. Of course DACAs don't contribute to our economy. We get LESS tax $$ from them same as any other illegal aliens becasue, as I said (some people have to be told twice) >>
1. Many illegals work
off the books (zero tax $ paid)
2. Illegals work for
lower wages than Americans (less tax $ paid)
3. Immigrants (legal & illegal extract 138 TRILLION over 10 years OUT OF OUR ECONOMY ie, $133 Billion X 10) in
remittances$$$.
Strike 1....Strike 2.....Strike 3
Remittance Flows Worldwide in 2016
The fallacy of immigrationists is that they claim that low wage immigrants "contribute" by working and paying taxes. The part they leave out is that this work is in REPLACEMENT OF American workers who would have higher wages, pay MORE tax, and don't work off the books.
To say illegals "contribute" is like saying I will contribute to the ASPCA with my contribution of $70, INSTEAD OF YOUR CONTRIBUTION of $100. Conclusion: LOSS of $30 for the ASPCA.
I can see Economics is not your strong suit. You seem hung up on those remittances, but ask yourself, what happens if all that money is kept here? The work for those dollars has already been done. No extra goods will be produced. Additional dollars chasing the same amount of goods, what happens?
Working off the books. Do you really think citizens don't work off the books given the opportunity? I know I have. I know my sister lived in New York City and worked off the books for seven years. It is called the shadow economy and it is estimated to be TWO TRILLION DOLLARS a year. Do you really want to make the claim that it is all immigrants?
Trillions Earned Under Table As More Work Off Radar
But now to your first two claims. It is an interesting thing, some states have a large immigrant population and some states hardly have any. That provides a great opportunity to study the impact of those immigrants on wages and productivity. Here is what they found,
First, immigrants do not crowd-out employment of (or hours worked by) natives; they add to total employment and reduce the share of highly educated workers, because of their larger share of low-skilled relative to native workers. Second, immigrants increase total factor productivity. These productivity gains may arise because of the more efficient allocation of skills to tasks, as immigrants are allocated to manual-intensive jobs, promoting competition and pushing natives to perform communication-intensive tasks more efficiently. Indeed, a measure of task-specialization of native workers induced by immigrants explains half to two thirds of the positive effect on productivity.
Third, Peri finds that inflows of immigrants decrease capital intensity and the skill-bias of production technologies. The decrease in capital intensity comes from an increase in total factor productivity; the capital-to-labor ratio remains unchanged because investment rises coincident with the inflow of immigrants. The reduction in the skill-intensity of production occurs as immigrants influence the choice of production techniques toward those that more efficiently use less educated workers and are less capital intensive.
Finally, Peri finds that for less educated natives, higher immigration has very little effect on wages, while for highly educated natives, the wage effect of higher immigration is positive. In summary, he finds that a one percent increase in employment in a US state, attributable only to immigration, is associated with a 0.4 to 0.5 percent increase in income per worker in that state.
http://www.nber.org/digest/mar10/w15507.html
Now, I don't have a lot of confidence that you understand the above quote. Later tonight I will be happy to explain what it means and provide examples. But for the moment I believe you can understand the last bit, a one percent increase in immigration results in an almost half a percent increase in wages PER WORKER. They don't decrease wages, they actually increase them, mostly due to increases in productivity.
And I can tell you something. Some of the jobs they do few, if any citizens, are going to do them at any wage. My son spent two summers doing field work. He and his friend were the only non-Hispanic people on the crews. And it was easy to get the "job". You just showed up at a field before the sun came up and worked your ass off till the sun went down. He got paid cash, and he and his friend made more money those summers than any of their fellow high school students. So why didn't more of them show up?
And he benefited more than just his income. It taught him about hard work, it taught him about respecting those immigrants, and most of all, well it taught him about discipline. That is why he is now 22, living in his own home in a upper class neighborhood and making more money than the average Harvard graduate. He will be the first to tell you that it is in no small part due to those summers in the fields.
