Enough about guns, what's with all the illegal immigrants!?

[einhander]

I'll dig something up. The CBO did a really good study on the impact on local budgets (net drain), but I know I read something that aggregates data at a national and economic, rather than fiscal, level. I'll see if I can find it.

[The Dark Side of Will]

Fair enough. I did some reading up. Apparently, the courts have interpreted the 14th amendment to allow for anyone here physically to be given the same rights as natural born or naturalized citizenry.

Detainees in Gitmo have the right to get lawyers.

Well not quite. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were concieved and written into law in this country.

No, they're not.

I do feel it is a travesty that the courts have ruled that even though someone is here illegally, they get all the rights citizens do save for firearm ownership and voting rights. The ends do not justify the means.

Humans have rights because they're human, not because of government. The only thing a government can do with rights is take them away.

[smooth]

It's a little convoluted but it basically boils down to labor paying into things like payroll, Medicaid, and social security taxes that they'll never draw from. Working immigrants also provide cheap labor and high demand of products. They aren't likely to seek public services and they don't commit street crime because they don't want to draw attention to themselves for fear of deportation.

Impoverished immigrants who can't find work tend to draw on those social services and some do commit street crime. Some poor use resources like schools and hospitals whereas some poor use resources like police and incarceration. The former tend to stay and their children tend to become tax paying persons some citizens and some not. The former tend to get deported after serving their sentences.

It's difficult to measure the full net impact but a fair assessment would be working immigrants input more than they draw and non working immigrants tend to draw more than they input. Currently we have more working immigrants than non-working...strangely so given the current employment climate. It's a sad commentary on work opportunities in this country at this time.

Things like universal health care are reducing the costs of treating the impoverished both immigrants and citizens. Local impacted communities are declaring that they will no longer hold immigrants past their incarceration sentences, again lowering that traditional cost.

[einhander]

^ This is the gist of what I recall reading, but there was also a study that measured the impact/contribution of lower wages paid to undocumented workers on goods and services consumed by working citizens. If you include unrequited payment for social services + cost of cheaper goods and services, the benefits were tangible.

I'm sorry I haven't found it yet, but I think it was from University of Michigan.

[smooth]

I had to turn my computer in for repairs so I've had to post from my tiny iPhone for the past few days...hard to dig up and post links but I'll read whatever is posted :)

[ParsedOut]

So now that we're actually having a somewhat honest conversation again. What am I missing when I say it seems reasonable to grant say 300-500% more applications for immigration but enforce certain stipulations? Such as the citizenship is probationary for 3-5-7 years? The "head of household" must be employed for 80% of that period, similar to a work visa. If any member of that household commits any semi-serious crime during that period it's revoked. Can't apply for welfare services and can't vote during "probation". Income tax rate is lowered as well to offset the restricted rights and help build a start.

Now on the surface I can see some struggles with this, first off the job availability for such a large influx of largely "unskilled or limited skills" workers. The job market that is fitting for their skill set may become saturated pretty quickly? Not sure. Also, this will impact local businesses that hire undocumented workers, too bad so sad but it will have an affect on that aspect of the economy. Other than stubborn politicians (on both ends) what else is missing?

Let me be clear, I'm talking about increasing legal immigration...not amnesty for the "Dreamers" or whatever the hell they're being called now.

[einhander]

So now that we're actually having a somewhat honest conversation again. What am I missing when I say it seems reasonable to grant say 300-500% more applications for immigration but enforce certain stipulations? Such as the citizenship is probationary for 3-5-7 years?

Other than stubborn politicians (on both ends) what else is missing?

You kind of answered your own question.

All of those ideas have, in one form or another, been put into various bills over the years. There is no technical issue at play here. It really is all politics.

[ParsedOut]

You kind of answered your own question.

All of those ideas have, in one form or another, been put into various bills over the years. There is no technical issue at play here. It really is all politics.

True, I'd imagine the bills put forth were not clean enough for either party, I'm sure they were packed full of other agenda items. We need a political cleansing.

[einhander]

Totally agree. It would be great if a simple, straightforward bill could be passed. Not with anyone on either side of the aisle from this lot though.

[Vedubin01]

Why has only one person acknowledged the net economic benefit provided by illegal immigrants?

The National Research Council (NRC) estimated in 1996 that immigrant households (legal and illegal) create a net fiscal burden (taxes paid minus services used) on all levels of government of between $11.4 billion and $20.2 billion annually.7

http://cis.org/node/4573

[einhander]

The National Research Council (NRC) estimated in 1996 that immigrant households (legal and illegal) create a net fiscal burden (taxes paid minus services used) on all levels of government of between $11.4 billion and $20.2 billion annually.7

http://cis.org/node/4573

Can you explain what you meant in your earlier post with the WaPo article?

[Vedubin01]

Can you explain what you meant in your earlier post with the WaPo article?

The crisis on our border is the direct and predictable result of President Obama's sustained effort to undermine America's immigration laws. As the president's previous director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), John Sandweg recently acknowledged: "if you are a run-of-the-mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting deported are close to zero." Enforcement has collapsed.


Today President Obama says he needs $3.7 billion from Congress to handle the crisis his lawless policies are creating. Amazingly, the funding request further advertises his administration's amnesty efforts and our fraud-riddled asylum programs, while explicitly omitting any request for expedited deportation authority. The request is also not paid for. The administration wants to borrow every penny.

[smooth]

From the study you linked:

"At the individual level, excluding any costs for their children, the NRC estimated a net lifetime fiscal drain of -$89,000 (1996 dollars) for an immigrant without a high school diploma, and a net fiscal drain of -$31,000 for an immigrant with only a high school education. However, more educated immigrants create a lifetime net fiscal benefit of +$105,000.9"

Again, it's important to disaggregate the data when discussing immigrant fiscal impact.

[einhander]

The crisis on our border is the direct and predictable result of President Obama's sustained effort to undermine America's immigration laws. As the president's previous director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), John Sandweg recently acknowledged: "if you are a run-of-the-mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting deported are close to zero." Enforcement has collapsed.


Today President Obama says he needs $3.7 billion from Congress to handle the crisis his lawless policies are creating. Amazingly, the funding request further advertises his administration's amnesty efforts and our fraud-riddled asylum programs, while explicitly omitting any request for expedited deportation authority. The request is also not paid for. The administration wants to borrow every penny.

Obama has deported more immigrants than any of the past three presidents, I believe.

He is now asking for $3.7b to enhance border protection and deportation authority. I haven't see exactly how the money will be spent, but the headline and article pointed to enforcement and deportation.

It's great you can cut and paste from Sen Sessions. Are you able to think for yourself?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/07/08/sessions-immigration-reform-column/12354693/

Today President Obama says he needs $3.7 billion from Congress to handle the crisis his lawless policies are creating. Amazingly, the funding request further advertises his administration's amnesty efforts and our fraud-riddled asylum programs, while explicitly omitting any request for expedited deportation authority. The request is also not paid for. The administration wants to borrow every penny.

[smooth]

The saddest part of his position is that he's apparently completely unaware of the past few decades of foreign policy that have resulted in impoverished conditions and many of these kids' parents being murdered thereby creating wave upon wave of refugees.

and of course it's all due to Obama undermining the United States with lawless policies because that's what sitting Presidents do as standard operating procedures...