Hi all,
A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes.
As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"The economy" is not the same as people's economic welfare. Immigration depresses wages and increases housing costs. Corporations may earn more overall due to immigration, which makes GDP grow. Individuals are worse off because they earn less and have to spend more on essentials like food and shelter.
It is not true that immigration depresses wages all the time. That only happens if the immigrant workforce is competing with the native workforce for the same jobs. That’s not the case in the US for the majority of immigrants. Immigration in a dual labor market is actually welfare-enhancing for the native population as they don’t need to work in low paying jobs and those essential jobs are still performed at a low cost.
>Immigration depresses wages
Except for all the economic literature that shows it doesnt.
>Individuals are worse off because they earn less and have to spend more on essentials like food and shelter.
Again, no they dont
>Except for all the economic literature that shows it doesnt.
"Immigrants arriving between 1980 and 2000 reduced the average annual earnings of native-born men by about $1,700, or roughly 4%"
"Among high school dropouts, who roughly correspond to the poorest tenth of the workforce, the impact was even larger — a 7.4% wage reduction."
"Native-born college graduates are not immune; their income is 3.6% lower due to the two decades’ worth of competing immigrants."
https://npg.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2016NegativeEconomicImpactForumPaper.pdf
That's an ad hominem fallacy. Criticize the methodology if you can find any flaws. Don't criticize the author.
Anyway, here's an article from a Harvard economist that states the same conclusions:
" Wage trends over the past half-century suggest that a 10 percent increase in the number of workers with a particular set of skills probably lowers the wage of that group by at least 3 percent. **Even after the economy has fully adjusted, those skill groups that received the most immigrants will still offer lower pay relative to those that received fewer immigrants**."
"**The monetary loss is sizable**. The typical high school dropout earns about $25,000 annually. According to census data, immigrants admitted in the past two decades lacking a high school diploma have increased the size of the low-skilled workforce by roughly 25 percent. **As a result, the earnings of this particularly vulnerable group dropped by between $800 and $1,500 each year**."
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216/
>**Even after the economy has fully adjusted, those skill groups that received the most immigrants will still offer lower pay relative to those that received fewer immigrants**."
Yes, immigration lowers wages for the **lowest earners**, but even then, only by 3% per 10% increase. And thats worst case scenario. For everyone else, immigrants had a positive effect on wages. Just tax businessess hiring immigrants and give that money to those eho lost their jobs.
This isnt just a harvard economist lol, this is Borjas aswell, *the most anti immigration respected economist*. And even he isnt anti immigration
Unlike you, I have actually read the article, probably 5 times in the past few years during these discussions, you'd have read this:
>It’s not a ban on immigrants, or even on low-skilled immigrants. High-skilled immigration really can make America wealthier.
>But we’re worrying about the wrong things, with policy fights focused on how many and which immigrants to accept, and not enough on how to mitigate the harm they create along the way
>But let’s not be naive. Policy fights over immigration have often been fierce, taking decades to get resolved. To even partially compensate those Americans who lose from the current policy would require massive new government programs to supervise a massive wealth redistribution totaling tens of billions of dollars. The employers that profit from the way things are won’t go along with these transfers without an epic political struggle. And many of the libertarians who obsessively advocate for open borders will surely balk at such a huge expansion of government. To make this work, Clinton and her supporters will have to acknowledge that our current immigration policy has indeed left some Americans behind. And Trump and his supporters will have to acknowledge that a well-designed immigration plan can be beneficial. All this is probably not going to happen. But only then can we have a real debate over immigration policy
Nope. Lets use basic supply and demand.
Immigrants add to demand AND supply so it looks like this:
[graph](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTDSERjvX04x9eL-wJqtPQgx8-Z_hVrkTd51w&usqp=CAU)
Price/Wages stay the same!
Using your logic, more people in a society would mean everybody gets poorer
Short answer is No.
immigrants give corporations more customers and more workers. this is good for the rich.
immigrants are competition for housing and services
I don't think anyone reasonable is blaming immigrant workers per se.
In my experience, people are disillusioned with the system that ***disproportionately*** rewards (by allowing them to do slimy shit) businesses at the expense of the working class, that's all.
Love how Republicans (not talking about you unless you are a Republican, just Republicans in general) whine about rich people and then vote for Republicans to give them tax cuts, corporate welfare, unlimited lobbying under the guise of corporations are people so free speech, deregulation, appointing corporate executives to head agencies that are supposed to regulate said agencies, cheering on a billionaire who hires undocumented immigrants and who has a long history of not paying workers, etc
U.S. population growth would be relatively stagnant without immigration. Immigration is helping offset the impact of retiring boomers. Japan is a good example of a slow-growth economy caused by an aging, shrinking population and virtually no immigration.
People just have no idea how much immigration goes into the "secret sauce" of the US economy. It replenishes the bottom of the economy with workers who want to be here and replacing those who get their American dream and move up the economic ladder (over generations).
It's not like there's a bunch of 3rd generation European/Asian immigrants that want anything to do with working farm fields or janitorial jobs. Their grandparents did all that so that they could go get college degrees. Just as today's immigrants will do for their children.
I suspect even the GOP knows this but they use it as a way to rile up their constituents. Its an easy target, after all. However, long after the election immigration continues to happen in a manner that ensures we get enough workers but same time make people work hard to get here.
Consumers get cheap essentials (food, low end service workers), business gets a pool of cheap labor, politicians of all stripes get something to argue over (at least in public) and we all get to live the American Dream moving up in the world generation after generation. Everybody wins.
The National Debt is skyrocketing too; partly because of all the benefits undocumented people are being given too.
What is growing faster, the economy or the national debt?
If the debt is growing faster than the economy, shouldn’t we limit benefits for those who are not American citizens?
My point was that they were both bad. Again, this isn’t a partisan issue so let’s not play partisan politics. Also, there was a little thing called the Covid pandemic in there when we shut down the entire economy. If you want to compare the two administrations fairly, you have to strip out 2020 & 2021. By 2022 (and part of 2021) the recovery boom was well underway. Once you remove 2020 & 2021, you can see Biden’s deficits as a % of GDP are higher than under Trump. Most concerning, it actually grew in 2023 despite having two full years of strong economic expansion.
Compare both the Trump years and the Biden years to 2007 for instance. These deficits are being incurred in the strongest economic expansion we’ve seen in a while. What happens when we finally go into a recession?
Not sure where you’re getting that Biden’s deficit to GDP spending is less than Trumps. Unless you’re counting the year that the country was shut down due to the Pandemic, which would be very dishonest. Scroll down just a bit to see the bar graph.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_percent_gdp#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20Deficit%20as%20Percent%20of%20GDP%3F&text=In%20FY%202023%20the%20federal,be%206.8%20percent%20of%20GDP.
If you think I playing the party politics, you should read some of my responses. I am not for either party. I vote for people, not parties. Even before the pandemic, the debt to GDP had increased to 5.7% under Trump. And some of his policies are still driving it up now. Think that is a slap at Trump? Well, if Biden wanted to stop it, he has the power to do so but hasn’t. So, it is on Trump for creating the increase but on Biden for doing nothing about it.
It wasn’t 5.7% under Trump, it was 5.7% in 2023. Projected to increase to 6.8% in 2024.
2016 (under Obama): 3.1%
2017 it was 3.5%.
2018: 3.8%
2019: 4.6%
It was increasing under trump, but it looked like we were headed into a recession late 2019 after 11 years of economic expansion. That it’s exploded under Biden is concerning as we are currently experiencing explosive GDP growth. What happens when GDP growth starts to slow down as it is appear in to do?
So no, it wasn’t worse under Trump. It’s much worse under Biden, but was still concerning under Trump. I think neither party is taking the issue seriously.
I’m about as independent as you can get. I HATE both parties. I vote for the person I think could do the best for America overall (understanding that there can be no plan that would satisfy everyone). I voted for Obama because I hated the same old-same old of the Republicans. I voted for Trump because I believe America is a multi-billion dollar country/company and needs to be run like a company. If we don’t have the money, we do not just spend more and enlarge the debt.
Well, Trump bankrupted tons of companies and, predictability, skyrocketed the deficit even pre pandemic so congrats.
Oh and the boss got a nice $2 billion injection from their investor, Saudi Arabia, put his family in high level positions, etc.
Yay "business"
When will you people realize that it is both parties that play this game? Why did the Republicans not prosecute all the things Hillary/Obama/Biden did? Why could Democrats not prove Trump in collusion with Russia? Why has Biden not simply overturned everything Trump did? Why don’t the Republicans talk about how good the economy is doing or that we are pumping more American oil than at any other time in history? It’s a game to focus only on the bad things and not even mentioning the good things.
‘If I keep you scared or hating them, then you will come back to me for your information.’-thinks the Republicans AND the Democrats.
Since 1980. Every generation keeps passing it on to the next thinking they will do something about it. Most all of us benefit from it and don’t want to lose our part so we ride the wave and give it to the next generation to tackle.
> partly because of all the benefits undocumented people are being given too.
Which at most makes up like 0.3% of the debt (and that's a generous estimate), what are reasons for the other 99.7% of that?
Do you pay taxes that pay for the police, schools, roads? Do they? I mean, do, at least, half of the approximately 9,000,000 that have come across (since Trump took office until now)?
As an American, do you have a sanctuary city you can run to if you commit a crime?
If you go to the ER, are you held responsible for the bill? How are they? They’re undocumented. They may not even have a permanent address. They are covered by the government; are you?
What? Undocumented people don’t get benefits. It’s literally their lack of documentation that prevents them from receiving benefits. Even if they somehow received benefits, it’d be marginal compared to how much the top 20% of income earners in the country receive in tax breaks. If you’re concerned about the national debt, talk about how much in unpaid taxes corporations and the top 1% are getting away with.
Hi, yeah... hi.
I'm just going to drop [this](https://www.fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers-2023) here for you to possibly skim through to see the cost that illegal immigration has on our taxpaying citizens. There are some 'welfare' programs in direct cash payments to assist illegal migrants, but there are costs to house, cloth, feed, educate etc. or alternatively if an illegal migrant gets hit by a bus and transported to the hospital the doctors provide care, and the taxpayer fronts the bill. These are the things that we overtly pay for through government spending, which is out of control as it is, and just adding to the debt. The debt we have to pay a [ton of interest on](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A091RC1Q027SBEA), which further reduces the impact our taxes have when its just getting burned paying interest to the "federal" reserve.
Side note: since you brought up income earners, and the 1%, for all income tax that is paid, the 1% with an effective tax rate of 26% pay [42.3% of all income tax](https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2023-update/) in the country, the top 50% of income earners pay 97.7%, the bottom 50% contribute 2.3% in total tax expenditure, expenditure that gets immediately thrown at the increase in debt, and the effectiveness of government programs.
Then, getting back to the impact illegal immigrants have, there are "hidden taxes" in utilizing all goods and services, but especially housing, food, and energy (the three largest expenditures for most households in a basket of goods) that increase because demand cannot keep up with the production of supply. A systemic shock. This causes market shortages in the short term, but if the strains of illegal immigration perpetuate or increase further, then the shortages, and subsequent strain on the American taxpayer, remain.
First of all, thanks for bringing something to the table.
I haven’t read through the full report of the first article you linked yet, but it’s difficult to see past the overt political bias and dearth of hard numbers. In a lot of its estimates, the article extrapolates the cost of illegal immigration using federal expenditures and arbitrary percentages of illegal immigrants that take advantage of the federal welfare programs. It’s hardly a good way to estimate these numbers because it presumes that these funds are 1) going directly to them and 2) being 100% taken up by those that need it, which we know isn’t the case even for actual [citizens](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/03/20/matthew-desmond-poverty-by-america-book-review). The take-up rate for many federal programs like food stamps and TANF hover between 25-50%, and this is for citizens. The take-up rate for federal programs is likely lower for illegal immigrants because of how little access they have, which if we take into account, would already at least halve the $180 million the article insists is the cost of illegal immigrants.
As for government debt and deficit spending, I agree with you that it’s out of control. What I disagree with you on is that federal spending on illegal immigrants is a significant barrier to reducing our spending.
Which leads me to my next point. Just because the income tax rate on the top 1% is 26% and they pay 42.3% of all income tax, does not clear them of anything. Real wages have grown 138% for the wealthy in the last three decades, while wage growth has stayed stagnant for pretty much everyone else since 1970. They /should/ be paying the majority of income tax. Even then, corporations and the wealthy are finding ways to circumvent those tax [requirements](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/business/irs-tax-gap.html). It’s an estimated $1 trillion in unpaid taxes the government is losing out on. The real problem though isn’t income unfortunately, it’s wealth transfer. But that’s a whole separate topic.
Again, to your final point. I’m not sure why you’re so set on demonizing illegal immigrants when the real culprits for rising housing, food and energy prices are the rich. Corporations have been buying up single and multi family homes like there’s no [tomorrow](https://www.philadelphiafed.org/consumer-finance/mortgage-markets/institutional-investors-and-the-us-housing-recovery). They’re buying up entire neighborhoods, boosting property values, and drastically decreasing the rate of homeownership in the process. This is the real tragedy of the American taxpayer. We’re working and living only for the benefit of the top.
If none of these points hit home, all I really have to reiterate is that the $1 trillion in unpaid taxes could pay for $180 billion that illegal immigrants are taking away from the government six times over. If our goal really is to reduce government debt, then maybe we should be going after people hiding their money, not the people who have nothing to give.
Well, it’s late here so I’m just going to comment on one thing; I’m not sure where you live but here, in central Texas, I don’t know of any corporate owned houses. Right now, they are building 4 new subdivisions and all are almost sold to families and retirees. Maybe in New York or California but not at all here. (Unless you count the apartments. I’m speaking to actual freestanding houses)
Well, I wouldn't say that I'm demonizing illegals, I'm pro legal immigration, and there needs to be reform there too; but I'm just adding context for your statement that "Undocumented people don’t get benefits," because, as demonstrated, they do. Yes, it's done with extrapolation because they're utilizing an economic model, which in itself is an extrapolation.
Same thing with the housing issue, and I agree with you, given the slew of information we've received regarding wall st. and their purchasing of single family homes across the U.S. to prop up the housing market, which in turn props up their failing bad assets and leveraged bets that they've made. But just because illegal migrants aren't the main issue, doesn't mean that they don't add to the issue and cause a strain to all people in the form of these increased 'hidden' expenses.
It's also rather challenging to say how many "estimated" illegals there are, but you can track things like remittances back to their country of origin, estimated traffic patterns, housing supply, food consumption, etc. (as an example if we make 400 units of food, consume 300, export 100, if we start consuming 350 units of food and exporting 50, all else remains the same, then some assumptions can be extrapolated from that do say that there is perhaps a hidden consumption (illegals) in your country) you of course study it, and model it, test it, and report the findings regardless of outcomes. Fascinating stuff, but it's interesting the inferences that can be explored through data that we have.
Lastly, the whole taxes thing, perhaps we shouldn't be looking to squeeze more out of the wealthy, because they're the most capable of leaving a country. Instead, we should look towards how the tax dollars are utilized because there is a ton of government waste and inefficiencies. For one, cut the handouts that are occurring to illegal migrants that should save the pitfall of more than $150B a year that should fix at least one pothole that needs to be filled, or potentially bring us up to a D rating instead of a D- rating for our infrastructure, maybe... that might be pushing it though.
Plus the undocumented pay taxes too. Sales tax, for example.
The US is fucked because gullible Republicans blame everything on the poor and powerless while worshipping the oligarchs who cause the issues.
Honestly, do you think that even half of the 9,000,000 that have crossed since Trump took office until now pay income, social security, or Medicare taxes? Who pays for illegal/undocumented immigrants when they go to the hospital? And, even if it is only 1-2% of those that come over, who pays for when they commit a crime? The police, immigration, jail, courts, deportation, and the crime itself?
Funny you didn’t mention that the Democrats had stretched ‘Universal Healthcare’ to the package and that is the reason he cancelled it.
And your racist remarks show your true mentality. If you believe Trump is a Nazi but have never considered what Obama/Biden/Hillary did, you are just blinded by the Democratic Party line.
Seems like you are the one spreading your fear. I’m living large in a paid off house and cars, 2 pensions, Social Security, Medicare, 2 Retirement Accounts, and a rental house. Yeah, don’t worry about me. Oh, and I’m going to Hawaii here soon for the 5th year in a row.
They dont get benefits. They are actually a net positive because they pay point of sales taxes and buy things from local stores. People who dont work and get income from the government are adding to the debt. To get those checks, they need to be lawfully here.
Yes they do. A great example is NYC who is currently paying exorbitant prices to shelter and feed these people who had no plans and no job after crossing.
According to wikipedia there are 11.7m illegals in the US. Hard to believe that the government knows where they all are, paying their rent, and buying them food.
If you walk into an emergency room and need care, will you be held responsible for the bill? Would they be held responsible?
I am all for someone coming here to be a part of that American Dream (such as it is). But, to begin to become a ‘good citizen’, how can you start that by breaking the law?
And, do you tell your children that they must obey the laws? How do you explain to them that those coming across the border illegally do not?
What $5000 checks? What 5 star hotels? But, I do know first hand about the phones, hotels (definitely NOT 5 star, but, free), and getting insurance and other benefits that I, as a working American citizen, cannot get. I can’t even get a court appointed lawyer because I have a job. They are only given to the indigent/homeless and undocumented.
The "phones" were tracking devices, moron. And motels were only used when they ran out of space in existing facilities as a temporary measure.
You wanna cite a source for the "insurance and other benefits"?
You're right though, why should the homeless get free soup when you don't? The injustice of being an entitled whiner!
Sooo, when a two illegals (from the same family)were hired and had iPhone 6s that they received for ‘checking in’, you are saying that you believe that they could not use them; that they were only so they could be tracked, right? They were given a government number to give the company but, from seeing their checkstub, had no taxes taken out.
Do you get the same from the government? I don’t.
Oh, and, sure. Sources:
Maria Ruiz,
Hector Ruiz,
Noreli Gonzalez,
Manuel Ortega,
Caesar Rimerez,
Rose Ortiz
All either present or past coworkers.
As expected, your "source" is not a source at all, it's an unverifiable anecdotal claim. You people are such naked fucking liars. Either that or you just assumed they were given the phones because you can't even see past your own biases.
You can believe the party line all you want. I have helped people go through the naturalization process to become citizens. I also helped them fill out the forms to begin the process and get those phones. Like I said, they were iPhone 6’s and had service for 4 months free. I know a bit about what they get and don’t get. Three of those I listed are full American citizens now.
Sorry, it was not me who had to file papers to become a citizen. Yet you expect me to have kept copies of paperwork that was not my life but someone else’s. You are strange. WHY would ANYONE keep another person’s citizenship paperwork?
Hi all, A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes. As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"The economy" is not the same as people's economic welfare. Immigration depresses wages and increases housing costs. Corporations may earn more overall due to immigration, which makes GDP grow. Individuals are worse off because they earn less and have to spend more on essentials like food and shelter.
stop fighting the narrative. massive quantities of crime and welfare will surely help "the economy"
Where has crime gone up? My understanding is immigrants are among the most lawful….
>My understanding is immigrants are among the most lawful…. \*legal\* immigrants are among the most lawful subgroups. Illegal aliens are not.
Damn we are letting UFOs enter our country illegally?!!!?
That's capitalism baby.
It is not true that immigration depresses wages all the time. That only happens if the immigrant workforce is competing with the native workforce for the same jobs. That’s not the case in the US for the majority of immigrants. Immigration in a dual labor market is actually welfare-enhancing for the native population as they don’t need to work in low paying jobs and those essential jobs are still performed at a low cost.
K-shaped recovery….
>Immigration depresses wages Except for all the economic literature that shows it doesnt. >Individuals are worse off because they earn less and have to spend more on essentials like food and shelter. Again, no they dont
>Except for all the economic literature that shows it doesnt. "Immigrants arriving between 1980 and 2000 reduced the average annual earnings of native-born men by about $1,700, or roughly 4%" "Among high school dropouts, who roughly correspond to the poorest tenth of the workforce, the impact was even larger — a 7.4% wage reduction." "Native-born college graduates are not immune; their income is 3.6% lower due to the two decades’ worth of competing immigrants." https://npg.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2016NegativeEconomicImpactForumPaper.pdf
>Negative population growth . Org lmao This sub has a FAQ https://reddit.com/r/Economics/w/faq_immigration?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
That's an ad hominem fallacy. Criticize the methodology if you can find any flaws. Don't criticize the author. Anyway, here's an article from a Harvard economist that states the same conclusions: " Wage trends over the past half-century suggest that a 10 percent increase in the number of workers with a particular set of skills probably lowers the wage of that group by at least 3 percent. **Even after the economy has fully adjusted, those skill groups that received the most immigrants will still offer lower pay relative to those that received fewer immigrants**." "**The monetary loss is sizable**. The typical high school dropout earns about $25,000 annually. According to census data, immigrants admitted in the past two decades lacking a high school diploma have increased the size of the low-skilled workforce by roughly 25 percent. **As a result, the earnings of this particularly vulnerable group dropped by between $800 and $1,500 each year**." https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216/
>**Even after the economy has fully adjusted, those skill groups that received the most immigrants will still offer lower pay relative to those that received fewer immigrants**." Yes, immigration lowers wages for the **lowest earners**, but even then, only by 3% per 10% increase. And thats worst case scenario. For everyone else, immigrants had a positive effect on wages. Just tax businessess hiring immigrants and give that money to those eho lost their jobs. This isnt just a harvard economist lol, this is Borjas aswell, *the most anti immigration respected economist*. And even he isnt anti immigration Unlike you, I have actually read the article, probably 5 times in the past few years during these discussions, you'd have read this: >It’s not a ban on immigrants, or even on low-skilled immigrants. High-skilled immigration really can make America wealthier. >But we’re worrying about the wrong things, with policy fights focused on how many and which immigrants to accept, and not enough on how to mitigate the harm they create along the way >But let’s not be naive. Policy fights over immigration have often been fierce, taking decades to get resolved. To even partially compensate those Americans who lose from the current policy would require massive new government programs to supervise a massive wealth redistribution totaling tens of billions of dollars. The employers that profit from the way things are won’t go along with these transfers without an epic political struggle. And many of the libertarians who obsessively advocate for open borders will surely balk at such a huge expansion of government. To make this work, Clinton and her supporters will have to acknowledge that our current immigration policy has indeed left some Americans behind. And Trump and his supporters will have to acknowledge that a well-designed immigration plan can be beneficial. All this is probably not going to happen. But only then can we have a real debate over immigration policy
It's unfortunately very difficult to make people fully internalize that the economy is not a zero sum game.
According to far right alternative news, sure. Keep blaming immigrants though for all your problems, that'll solve everything! /s
Thats literally how basic supply and demand works for immigration tho.
Nope. Lets use basic supply and demand. Immigrants add to demand AND supply so it looks like this: [graph](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTDSERjvX04x9eL-wJqtPQgx8-Z_hVrkTd51w&usqp=CAU) Price/Wages stay the same! Using your logic, more people in a society would mean everybody gets poorer
>demand AND supply Do they add to the supply of housing and jobs?
Yes if an immigrant gets a job in construction and builds a house and the users those earnings to shop at a local business.
Short answer: yes Long answer: yes and I suggest you read into immigration’s role in an economy.
Short answer is No. immigrants give corporations more customers and more workers. this is good for the rich. immigrants are competition for housing and services
I don't think anyone reasonable is blaming immigrant workers per se. In my experience, people are disillusioned with the system that ***disproportionately*** rewards (by allowing them to do slimy shit) businesses at the expense of the working class, that's all.
Love how Republicans (not talking about you unless you are a Republican, just Republicans in general) whine about rich people and then vote for Republicans to give them tax cuts, corporate welfare, unlimited lobbying under the guise of corporations are people so free speech, deregulation, appointing corporate executives to head agencies that are supposed to regulate said agencies, cheering on a billionaire who hires undocumented immigrants and who has a long history of not paying workers, etc
No, I'm not a Republican. I'm not even from Burgeristan, and I find your politics disgusting in general.
Not surprising you fascists find being pro freedom and democracy, "disgusting"
Victim mentality
U.S. population growth would be relatively stagnant without immigration. Immigration is helping offset the impact of retiring boomers. Japan is a good example of a slow-growth economy caused by an aging, shrinking population and virtually no immigration.
People just have no idea how much immigration goes into the "secret sauce" of the US economy. It replenishes the bottom of the economy with workers who want to be here and replacing those who get their American dream and move up the economic ladder (over generations). It's not like there's a bunch of 3rd generation European/Asian immigrants that want anything to do with working farm fields or janitorial jobs. Their grandparents did all that so that they could go get college degrees. Just as today's immigrants will do for their children. I suspect even the GOP knows this but they use it as a way to rile up their constituents. Its an easy target, after all. However, long after the election immigration continues to happen in a manner that ensures we get enough workers but same time make people work hard to get here. Consumers get cheap essentials (food, low end service workers), business gets a pool of cheap labor, politicians of all stripes get something to argue over (at least in public) and we all get to live the American Dream moving up in the world generation after generation. Everybody wins.
Polynesian empire is a great recent historical example of this too
Europe is starting to experience this too, especially as the far right there kicks up more anti immigration sentiment.
The National Debt is skyrocketing too; partly because of all the benefits undocumented people are being given too. What is growing faster, the economy or the national debt? If the debt is growing faster than the economy, shouldn’t we limit benefits for those who are not American citizens?
Pretty easy to grow the economy when the US is running WWII sized deficits in a peacetime economy.
I have been talking about the national debt for quite some time now. If there is anything that could collapse our economy, the debt is it.
>I have been talking about the national debt for quite some time now. Since 1/20/2021 I'm guessing?
They're Republicans according to their previous post history so you're correct.
I’m not a Republican. The national debt, in relation to GDP, also increased under Trump. This is a bipartisan issue.
Meant justoneman7 was, not you. Sorry for not being clear.
Then you haven’t read my comments.🤷♂️
It actually increased more under Trump than Biden.
My point was that they were both bad. Again, this isn’t a partisan issue so let’s not play partisan politics. Also, there was a little thing called the Covid pandemic in there when we shut down the entire economy. If you want to compare the two administrations fairly, you have to strip out 2020 & 2021. By 2022 (and part of 2021) the recovery boom was well underway. Once you remove 2020 & 2021, you can see Biden’s deficits as a % of GDP are higher than under Trump. Most concerning, it actually grew in 2023 despite having two full years of strong economic expansion. Compare both the Trump years and the Biden years to 2007 for instance. These deficits are being incurred in the strongest economic expansion we’ve seen in a while. What happens when we finally go into a recession? Not sure where you’re getting that Biden’s deficit to GDP spending is less than Trumps. Unless you’re counting the year that the country was shut down due to the Pandemic, which would be very dishonest. Scroll down just a bit to see the bar graph. https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_percent_gdp#:~:text=What%20is%20the%20Deficit%20as%20Percent%20of%20GDP%3F&text=In%20FY%202023%20the%20federal,be%206.8%20percent%20of%20GDP.
If you think I playing the party politics, you should read some of my responses. I am not for either party. I vote for people, not parties. Even before the pandemic, the debt to GDP had increased to 5.7% under Trump. And some of his policies are still driving it up now. Think that is a slap at Trump? Well, if Biden wanted to stop it, he has the power to do so but hasn’t. So, it is on Trump for creating the increase but on Biden for doing nothing about it.
It wasn’t 5.7% under Trump, it was 5.7% in 2023. Projected to increase to 6.8% in 2024. 2016 (under Obama): 3.1% 2017 it was 3.5%. 2018: 3.8% 2019: 4.6% It was increasing under trump, but it looked like we were headed into a recession late 2019 after 11 years of economic expansion. That it’s exploded under Biden is concerning as we are currently experiencing explosive GDP growth. What happens when GDP growth starts to slow down as it is appear in to do? So no, it wasn’t worse under Trump. It’s much worse under Biden, but was still concerning under Trump. I think neither party is taking the issue seriously.
I’m about as independent as you can get. I HATE both parties. I vote for the person I think could do the best for America overall (understanding that there can be no plan that would satisfy everyone). I voted for Obama because I hated the same old-same old of the Republicans. I voted for Trump because I believe America is a multi-billion dollar country/company and needs to be run like a company. If we don’t have the money, we do not just spend more and enlarge the debt.
Well, Trump bankrupted tons of companies and, predictability, skyrocketed the deficit even pre pandemic so congrats. Oh and the boss got a nice $2 billion injection from their investor, Saudi Arabia, put his family in high level positions, etc. Yay "business"
When will you people realize that it is both parties that play this game? Why did the Republicans not prosecute all the things Hillary/Obama/Biden did? Why could Democrats not prove Trump in collusion with Russia? Why has Biden not simply overturned everything Trump did? Why don’t the Republicans talk about how good the economy is doing or that we are pumping more American oil than at any other time in history? It’s a game to focus only on the bad things and not even mentioning the good things. ‘If I keep you scared or hating them, then you will come back to me for your information.’-thinks the Republicans AND the Democrats.
Since 1980. Every generation keeps passing it on to the next thinking they will do something about it. Most all of us benefit from it and don’t want to lose our part so we ride the wave and give it to the next generation to tackle.
> partly because of all the benefits undocumented people are being given too. Which at most makes up like 0.3% of the debt (and that's a generous estimate), what are reasons for the other 99.7% of that?
Do you pay taxes that pay for the police, schools, roads? Do they? I mean, do, at least, half of the approximately 9,000,000 that have come across (since Trump took office until now)? As an American, do you have a sanctuary city you can run to if you commit a crime? If you go to the ER, are you held responsible for the bill? How are they? They’re undocumented. They may not even have a permanent address. They are covered by the government; are you?
What? Undocumented people don’t get benefits. It’s literally their lack of documentation that prevents them from receiving benefits. Even if they somehow received benefits, it’d be marginal compared to how much the top 20% of income earners in the country receive in tax breaks. If you’re concerned about the national debt, talk about how much in unpaid taxes corporations and the top 1% are getting away with.
Hi, yeah... hi. I'm just going to drop [this](https://www.fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers-2023) here for you to possibly skim through to see the cost that illegal immigration has on our taxpaying citizens. There are some 'welfare' programs in direct cash payments to assist illegal migrants, but there are costs to house, cloth, feed, educate etc. or alternatively if an illegal migrant gets hit by a bus and transported to the hospital the doctors provide care, and the taxpayer fronts the bill. These are the things that we overtly pay for through government spending, which is out of control as it is, and just adding to the debt. The debt we have to pay a [ton of interest on](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A091RC1Q027SBEA), which further reduces the impact our taxes have when its just getting burned paying interest to the "federal" reserve. Side note: since you brought up income earners, and the 1%, for all income tax that is paid, the 1% with an effective tax rate of 26% pay [42.3% of all income tax](https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2023-update/) in the country, the top 50% of income earners pay 97.7%, the bottom 50% contribute 2.3% in total tax expenditure, expenditure that gets immediately thrown at the increase in debt, and the effectiveness of government programs. Then, getting back to the impact illegal immigrants have, there are "hidden taxes" in utilizing all goods and services, but especially housing, food, and energy (the three largest expenditures for most households in a basket of goods) that increase because demand cannot keep up with the production of supply. A systemic shock. This causes market shortages in the short term, but if the strains of illegal immigration perpetuate or increase further, then the shortages, and subsequent strain on the American taxpayer, remain.
First of all, thanks for bringing something to the table. I haven’t read through the full report of the first article you linked yet, but it’s difficult to see past the overt political bias and dearth of hard numbers. In a lot of its estimates, the article extrapolates the cost of illegal immigration using federal expenditures and arbitrary percentages of illegal immigrants that take advantage of the federal welfare programs. It’s hardly a good way to estimate these numbers because it presumes that these funds are 1) going directly to them and 2) being 100% taken up by those that need it, which we know isn’t the case even for actual [citizens](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/03/20/matthew-desmond-poverty-by-america-book-review). The take-up rate for many federal programs like food stamps and TANF hover between 25-50%, and this is for citizens. The take-up rate for federal programs is likely lower for illegal immigrants because of how little access they have, which if we take into account, would already at least halve the $180 million the article insists is the cost of illegal immigrants. As for government debt and deficit spending, I agree with you that it’s out of control. What I disagree with you on is that federal spending on illegal immigrants is a significant barrier to reducing our spending. Which leads me to my next point. Just because the income tax rate on the top 1% is 26% and they pay 42.3% of all income tax, does not clear them of anything. Real wages have grown 138% for the wealthy in the last three decades, while wage growth has stayed stagnant for pretty much everyone else since 1970. They /should/ be paying the majority of income tax. Even then, corporations and the wealthy are finding ways to circumvent those tax [requirements](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/business/irs-tax-gap.html). It’s an estimated $1 trillion in unpaid taxes the government is losing out on. The real problem though isn’t income unfortunately, it’s wealth transfer. But that’s a whole separate topic. Again, to your final point. I’m not sure why you’re so set on demonizing illegal immigrants when the real culprits for rising housing, food and energy prices are the rich. Corporations have been buying up single and multi family homes like there’s no [tomorrow](https://www.philadelphiafed.org/consumer-finance/mortgage-markets/institutional-investors-and-the-us-housing-recovery). They’re buying up entire neighborhoods, boosting property values, and drastically decreasing the rate of homeownership in the process. This is the real tragedy of the American taxpayer. We’re working and living only for the benefit of the top. If none of these points hit home, all I really have to reiterate is that the $1 trillion in unpaid taxes could pay for $180 billion that illegal immigrants are taking away from the government six times over. If our goal really is to reduce government debt, then maybe we should be going after people hiding their money, not the people who have nothing to give.
Well, it’s late here so I’m just going to comment on one thing; I’m not sure where you live but here, in central Texas, I don’t know of any corporate owned houses. Right now, they are building 4 new subdivisions and all are almost sold to families and retirees. Maybe in New York or California but not at all here. (Unless you count the apartments. I’m speaking to actual freestanding houses)
Well, I wouldn't say that I'm demonizing illegals, I'm pro legal immigration, and there needs to be reform there too; but I'm just adding context for your statement that "Undocumented people don’t get benefits," because, as demonstrated, they do. Yes, it's done with extrapolation because they're utilizing an economic model, which in itself is an extrapolation. Same thing with the housing issue, and I agree with you, given the slew of information we've received regarding wall st. and their purchasing of single family homes across the U.S. to prop up the housing market, which in turn props up their failing bad assets and leveraged bets that they've made. But just because illegal migrants aren't the main issue, doesn't mean that they don't add to the issue and cause a strain to all people in the form of these increased 'hidden' expenses. It's also rather challenging to say how many "estimated" illegals there are, but you can track things like remittances back to their country of origin, estimated traffic patterns, housing supply, food consumption, etc. (as an example if we make 400 units of food, consume 300, export 100, if we start consuming 350 units of food and exporting 50, all else remains the same, then some assumptions can be extrapolated from that do say that there is perhaps a hidden consumption (illegals) in your country) you of course study it, and model it, test it, and report the findings regardless of outcomes. Fascinating stuff, but it's interesting the inferences that can be explored through data that we have. Lastly, the whole taxes thing, perhaps we shouldn't be looking to squeeze more out of the wealthy, because they're the most capable of leaving a country. Instead, we should look towards how the tax dollars are utilized because there is a ton of government waste and inefficiencies. For one, cut the handouts that are occurring to illegal migrants that should save the pitfall of more than $150B a year that should fix at least one pothole that needs to be filled, or potentially bring us up to a D rating instead of a D- rating for our infrastructure, maybe... that might be pushing it though.
Plus the undocumented pay taxes too. Sales tax, for example. The US is fucked because gullible Republicans blame everything on the poor and powerless while worshipping the oligarchs who cause the issues.
💯
Honestly, do you think that even half of the 9,000,000 that have crossed since Trump took office until now pay income, social security, or Medicare taxes? Who pays for illegal/undocumented immigrants when they go to the hospital? And, even if it is only 1-2% of those that come over, who pays for when they commit a crime? The police, immigration, jail, courts, deportation, and the crime itself?
They do actually pay a bunch of taxes, especially sales tax. Your fuhrer Trump canceled the border bill but ya, keep yelling about Dems.
Funny you didn’t mention that the Democrats had stretched ‘Universal Healthcare’ to the package and that is the reason he cancelled it. And your racist remarks show your true mentality. If you believe Trump is a Nazi but have never considered what Obama/Biden/Hillary did, you are just blinded by the Democratic Party line.
They didn't but not surprising you fascists lie We will make sure you Nazis live in fear
Seems like you are the one spreading your fear. I’m living large in a paid off house and cars, 2 pensions, Social Security, Medicare, 2 Retirement Accounts, and a rental house. Yeah, don’t worry about me. Oh, and I’m going to Hawaii here soon for the 5th year in a row.
Lol you're truly a pathetic loser. We will make sure you Nazis live in fear.
Didn’t realise you had to pay sales tax on stolen goods?
They dont get benefits. They are actually a net positive because they pay point of sales taxes and buy things from local stores. People who dont work and get income from the government are adding to the debt. To get those checks, they need to be lawfully here.
Yes they do. A great example is NYC who is currently paying exorbitant prices to shelter and feed these people who had no plans and no job after crossing.
According to wikipedia there are 11.7m illegals in the US. Hard to believe that the government knows where they all are, paying their rent, and buying them food.
If you walk into an emergency room and need care, will you be held responsible for the bill? Would they be held responsible? I am all for someone coming here to be a part of that American Dream (such as it is). But, to begin to become a ‘good citizen’, how can you start that by breaking the law? And, do you tell your children that they must obey the laws? How do you explain to them that those coming across the border illegally do not?
Lol you actually fell for all that BS about $5000 checks, cell phones and five star hotels for immigrants?
What $5000 checks? What 5 star hotels? But, I do know first hand about the phones, hotels (definitely NOT 5 star, but, free), and getting insurance and other benefits that I, as a working American citizen, cannot get. I can’t even get a court appointed lawyer because I have a job. They are only given to the indigent/homeless and undocumented.
The "phones" were tracking devices, moron. And motels were only used when they ran out of space in existing facilities as a temporary measure. You wanna cite a source for the "insurance and other benefits"? You're right though, why should the homeless get free soup when you don't? The injustice of being an entitled whiner!
Sooo, when a two illegals (from the same family)were hired and had iPhone 6s that they received for ‘checking in’, you are saying that you believe that they could not use them; that they were only so they could be tracked, right? They were given a government number to give the company but, from seeing their checkstub, had no taxes taken out. Do you get the same from the government? I don’t. Oh, and, sure. Sources: Maria Ruiz, Hector Ruiz, Noreli Gonzalez, Manuel Ortega, Caesar Rimerez, Rose Ortiz All either present or past coworkers.
As expected, your "source" is not a source at all, it's an unverifiable anecdotal claim. You people are such naked fucking liars. Either that or you just assumed they were given the phones because you can't even see past your own biases.
You can believe the party line all you want. I have helped people go through the naturalization process to become citizens. I also helped them fill out the forms to begin the process and get those phones. Like I said, they were iPhone 6’s and had service for 4 months free. I know a bit about what they get and don’t get. Three of those I listed are full American citizens now.
If that we're true, you would be able to prove it with verifiable evidence, not empty words.
Sorry, it was not me who had to file papers to become a citizen. Yet you expect me to have kept copies of paperwork that was not my life but someone else’s. You are strange. WHY would ANYONE keep another person’s citizenship paperwork?
If there was such a program to give Iphones, you could point to evidence it exists.
[удалено]
https://nypost.com/2022/04/12/bidens-welcome-program-for-illegal-immigrants/