Saturday, February 16, 2019
The real debate is over legal immigration
The bipartisan bill that Trump turned down had, I think 1.7 million for border security including fencing. But it was considered no good because it was a fence instead of a wall. But there is more to Trump's position on immigration than just the wall. He wants to keep LEGAL immigration limited for, in particular, lower class workers, and in fact make it harder for such people to enter our country. Hence the comment about not wanting people to come in from "shithole" countries. (Whether this reduces to a desire not to let more black and brown people into our country can, I am sure, be questioned). But if we worked harder to let as many noncriminals as we can enter our country legally in an orderly manner, wouldn't it cut a significant portion of the market out of the illegal immigration racket? Everyone wants border security to keep bad people out of the country, even if they don't think a wall will provide best bang for the buck. (Emperor of China: We're going to build a big beautiful wall, and the Mongols are going to pay for it). But wouldn't we need less border security if we didn't put so many restrictions on legal immigration? Whatever happened to "Give me your tired, your poor?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
We would need less prison security if we didn't put so many people in prison. Less police if we didn't care about justice and protecting the innocent. Imagine the endless possibilities of such a great nation.
"But wouldn't we need less border security if we didn't put so many restrictions on legal immigration?"
Maybe, that's an interesting question. What should be the parameters? It's complicated...
"Whatever happened to "Give me your tired, your poor?""
Hypocrisy and selfishness won. That's what happened. Just look at SteveK's tone deaf comment...
Is there a Western country that doesn't restrict unskilled immigration? Are all of these countries wrong in doing so?
Legion of Logic said...
Is there a Western country that doesn't restrict unskilled immigration? Are all of these countries wrong in doing so?
We restrict to well below the demand for unskilled labor, or there would be very little illegal immigration.
SteveK said...
We would need less prison security if we didn't put so many people in prison.
But then where would all the black men live?
Less police if we didn't care about justice and protecting the innocent.
When did that become the focus of the police?
Imagine the endless possibilities of such a great nation.
I'm sure it terrifies you.
On supply and demand I found this:
These findings would accord with the simple law of supply and demand. A rapid increase in supply either holds down increases in wages or results in reduced wages. Harvard economist George Borjas, who participated in the NAS study, estimates that within a particular skill group, a 10 percent increase in supply results in at least a 3 percent reduction in wages.
As the NAS study notes, the two groups in the labor force most immediately affected are prior immigrants and high school dropouts. Many of the first-generation immigrants are Hispanic, and many of the high school dropouts, or those with only a high school degree, are African American. And there are studies showing that workers from these two groups have been hit hard by competition from immigrants.
In a 2014 survey, sociologist Stephen Steinberg concluded that legal and illegal immigration had damaged opportunities for African Americans “in construction, light manufacturing, building maintenance, the hotel and leisure industry, the health care industry, and even public-sector jobs where one-third of blacks are employed.”
In 2010, the U.S. Civil Rights Commission issued a report on “The Impact of Illegal Immigration on the Wages and Employment Opportunities of Black Workers.” It concluded that “illegal immigration to the United States in recent decades has tended to depress both wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate number of whom are black men.” As Steinberg notes, one of the great ironies of our recent history is that immigration policy, which was partly inspired by the civil rights movement, has probably had a negative effect on African Americans at a time when African Americans might have been able to take advantage of the passage of civil rights acts outlawing employment discrimination.
https://prospect.org/article/two-sides-immigration-policy
But if we worked harder to let as many noncriminals as we can enter our country legally in an orderly manner, wouldn't it cut a significant portion of the market out of the illegal immigration racket?
Possibly not. Even if constraints on legal immigration were relaxed to the extent that US demand for unskilled workers was satisfied and wages became depressed (and what US workers would vote for that?) there might still be a large reservoir of people in Mexico and Central and South America who would attempt to enter the country illegally to escape relative poverty, criminality, and corrupt and incompetent government.
Whatever happened to "Give me your tired, your poor?"
Well, they came, and the US economy grew hugely until it was no longer limited by available manpower but by the technologies of production and demand from overseas. Poor countries can't get rich by exporting their population. Like China and India and other countries around the world, they have to industrialise.
Post a Comment