The Political & Philosophy Thread

[Dak]

Letting anyone stay in your house and use your stuff as long as they leave a 6pack in the fridge isn't a sustainable model for immigration.

Deporting every illegal would be a shock to the system, but that's not automatically a bad thing, unless one makes some of their profits off cheap migrant labor.

 

[Einherjar86]

Letting anyone stay in your house and use your stuff as long as they leave a 6pack in the fridge isn't a sustainable model for immigration.

Deporting every illegal would be a shock to the system, but that's not automatically a bad thing, unless one makes some of their profits off cheap migrant labor.

I didn't say it would be good or bad, but it would be a shock, yes.

Your analogy isn't a good one. Studies suggest that second- and third-generation immigrants actually contribute to the economy and make up for monies spent on first-generation families.

 

[Dak]

Your analogy isn't a good one. Studies suggest that second- and third-generation immigrants actually contribute to the economy and make up for monies spent on first-generation families.

Maybe, but are those descendants of illegal immigrants or legal immigrants? Is that just averaged out over all immigrants from all countries of all legal statuses? Etc. "Immigrants" are not a homogeneous suite. Of course these are all purely economic arguments and I think that while that's highly important, it's not the only issue.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Thanks, I don't know all the specifics. I'm not sure these numbers make an argument for them being a drain, though.

I've read that more than half of undocumented immigrants file tax returns. Many pay taxes for programs they don't use. If most are working in agriculture, then that means they're assisting the performance of another sector, which translates into gains (i.e. more money than goes into its employees' pockets). I'm not only talking about taxes, but about buying products and working low wages.

The federal education budget has risen over the past decades but not enough to keep up with the number of students, far more of whom are white.

I'm not sure exactly how you can be so certain that they don't make a net contribution, but I'm certain they're not a total drain. That is, they do contribute to the economy, often in productive ways. Theoretically, deporting all of them would be like removing an organism from the ecosystem.

A person filing a tax return while in the bottom tax bracket pays virtually nothing. Using the IRS estimator for a hypothetical married illegal immigrant making $20k/yr, claiming two children as deductions and $600 in sales tax (nation median is ~6%, assuming half their wages are spent on goods), this is the result:



Despite all the kvetching about tax cuts for the rich, most poor people in practice only pay local and payroll taxes, neither of which make up for general costs of education, emergency room care, infrastructure, etc. That's because the poor's income exists right around the standard deduction.

Don't know what you mean by far more students being white over Hispanic. Non-white children have recently crossed into the majority, largely because of growing Hispanic numbers. Basically all children attend public schools, and the ones that don't (largely homeschooled or private schooled whites) still pay the same taxes for "programs they don't use". White and Asian men shoulder the overwhelming burden of taxes. Blacks, Hispanics, and women are basically net losses on the federal budget.

 

[Einherjar86]

A person filing a tax return while in the bottom tax bracket pays virtually nothing. Using the IRS estimator for a hypothetical married illegal immigrant making $20k/yr, claiming two children as deductions and $600 in sales tax (nation median is ~6%, assuming half their wages are spent on goods), this is the result:

View attachment 15512

Despite all the kvetching about tax cuts for the rich, most poor people in practice only pay local and payroll taxes, neither of which make up for general costs of education, emergency room care, infrastructure, etc. That's because the poor's income exists right around the standard deduction.

Two parts:

a) if they were paid more, then they would pay more in taxes; and

b) by earning so little, they put more money in the pockets of their employers, which helps them pay the taxes they owe. If white people worked those jobs and demanded higher pay, the companies would make less and there would be less overall growth.

I'm not making an argument in favor of either of those; but overall I think it's difficult to say that immigrants are a definitive drain on the economy.

Don't know what you mean by far more students being white over Hispanic. Non-white children have recently crossed into the majority, largely because of growing Hispanic numbers. Basically all children attend public schools, and the ones that don't (largely homeschooled or private schooled whites) still pay the same taxes for "programs they don't use". White and Asian men shoulder the overwhelming burden of taxes. Blacks, Hispanics, and women are basically net losses on the federal budget.

White students make up just under half of the total public school student body, I believe. Hispanics make up something like 25%, I believe...?

You're right that the majority of public school students are non-white, but they're not non-hispanic. I'm saying is that white students, demographically speaking, comprise a single set, whereas there are multiple subsets of the non-white majority. When we talk about specifically immigrant schoolchildren, the number goes way down. I'm not sure the exact numbers, but I'm willing to bet there are as many, if not more, impoverished white schoolchildren as there are impoverished immigrant schoolchildren (or the children of immigrants).

 

[CiG]

Why should anybody care about the benefits of illegal immigration? Is it just me or is that a weird thing to argue about? Also this reeks of the kind of thing I thought progressives were opposed to: illegal immigration benefits the corporations because they work for less and their bosses get to keep more money.

Hard to argue that people who say illegal immigration undercuts citizens working or looking for work are just paranoid xenophobes when you have GMD's biggest leftist literally making the most capitalist argument I think I've ever seen on the site in favour of illegal immigration.

 

[Einherjar86]

Hard to argue that people who say illegal immigration undercuts citizens working or looking for work are just paranoid xenophobes when you have GMD's biggest leftist literally making the most capitalist argument I think I've ever seen on the site in favour of illegal immigration.

If you haven't, you should read this piece I wrote (a long time ago, but that I still ultimately identify with): http://borrowingfromthefuture.blogspot.com/2014/09/dr-freelove-or-how-i-learned-to-stop.html

I accuse Americans of paranoia not because immigrants aren't coming here and accepting work; they most definitely are. I accuse Americans of paranoia because I don't think immigrants working here is a bad thing.

 

[CiG]

Well of course, nobody is coming to America illegally to undercut a professor or whatever you are lol that just reinforces what many poor and working class people already think about those in the media, higher education and politics: that you guys are completely out of touch.

I'll give it a read though.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Two parts:

a) if they were paid more, then they would pay more in taxes; and

b) by earning so little, they put more money in the pockets of their employers, which helps them pay the taxes they owe. If white people worked those jobs and demanded higher pay, the companies would make less and there would be less overall growth.

I'm not making an argument in favor of either of those; but overall I think it's difficult to say that immigrants are a definitive drain on the economy.

In a hypothetical commie land where literally every household makes the same amount of money without affecting employment or work incentives, they'd make $60k/yr. That might sound like a lot until you realize it's a husband and wife each making $30k/yr. With two children to support, the grand total income tax owed is, surprise surprise, still $0. It's $13k with no children but then you can't make the multi-generational argument. A token ~10% withholding tax still applies, but $6k/yr obviously doesn't pay the costs of just one child, let alone two.

White students make up just under half of the total public school student body, I believe. Hispanics make up something like 25%, I believe...?

You're right that the majority of public school students are non-white, but they're not non-hispanic. I'm saying is that white students, demographically speaking, comprise a single set, whereas there are multiple subsets of the non-white majority. When we talk about specifically immigrant schoolchildren, the number goes way down. I'm not sure the exact numbers, but I'm willing to bet there are as many, if not more, impoverished white schoolchildren as there are impoverished immigrant schoolchildren (or the children of immigrants).

The ratio is quickly shrinking, and in favor of demographics which statistically provide marginal or no net benefit towards the federal budget. Hispanics + blacks + Native Americans push the percentage to around 40%, when maybe a quarter of that bundle actually pays back more than what they take. Raw numbers of students don't matter when white and Asian families actually pay their way back.

 

[Einherjar86]

Well of course, nobody is coming to America illegally to undercut a professor or whatever you are lol that just reinforces what many poor and working class people already think about those in the media, higher education and politics: that you guys are completely out of touch.

Graduate programs are increasingly accepting students on visas and from overseas, and increasingly pushing diversity programs and student applicants who enhance the diversity of the department. You seem to insinuate that I would feel differently if my job was threatened, but I think these are good things.

 

[CiG]

You seem to continuously conflate legal immigration with illegal immigration. Most people conceptualize losing fair and square quite differently compared to being fucked over by a criminal.

 

[Einherjar86]

In a hypothetical commie land where literally every household makes the same amount of money without affecting employment or work incentives, they'd make $60k/yr. That might sound like a lot until you realize it's a husband and wife each making $30k/yr. With two children to support, the grand total income tax owed is, surprise surprise, still $0. It's $13k with no children but then you can't make the multi-generational argument. A token ~10% withholding tax still applies, but $6k/yr obviously doesn't pay the costs of just one child, let alone two.

The ratio is quickly shrinking, and in favor of demographics which statistically provide marginal or no net benefit towards the federal budget. Hispanics + blacks + Native Americans push the percentage to around 40%, when maybe a quarter of that bundle actually pays back more than what they take. Raw numbers of students don't matter when white and Asian families actually pay their way back.

And yet despite all of this, most economists agree that the majority of American families' incomes are increased because of immigration...

I understand the math here, but I don't think it equals a net drain on the economy. There are more factors at work than numbers.

You seem to continuously conflate legal immigration with illegal immigration. Most people conceptualize losing fair and square quite differently compared to being fucked over by a criminal.

That's true, I apologize. Although in all fairness, most paranoid Americans also conflate the two. Every week there's a new story about a white American cursing out a legal immigrant (or American-born minority) for being here "illegally."

All I mean to say is that I don't see much difference between a legal or illegal immigrant who's a productive member of the economy.

 

[CiG]

I wouldn't call illegally entering a country in the first place to be productive, although I guess it depends on how you define productivity. You seem to be looking at it through a lens of pure capital.

 

[Einherjar86]

Not just in terms of capital--it's also productive if staying in your home country means death by warlord, drug cartel, or autocrat.

 

[CiG]

I don't fault illegal immigrants for doing what they do, just like I don't fault a starving man who steals some food. They're both making logical decisions given the context of their lives, but if you give a free pass to the crime itself suddenly you have looting of supermarkets.

 

[Einherjar86]

if you give a free pass to the crime itself suddenly you have looting of supermarkets.

I don't think so, but mainly because I disagree with the analogy. We're talking about varying scales of "criminality."

 

[CiG]

Well I agree, looting of a supermarket is less important than permissively justifying and encouraging illegal immigration.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

And yet despite all of this, most economists agree that the majority of American families' incomes are increased because of immigration...

I understand the math here, but I don't think it equals a net drain on the economy. There are more factors at work than numbers.

[citation needed]

If you're talking about legal immigration, then obviously. Legal immigrants are overall highly successful. Illegal immigrants do help to make certain products and services cheaper, but not to the tune of several thousand dollars a year in savings.

 

[Einherjar86]

[citation needed]

There are many ways to debate immigration, but when it comes to economics, there isn’t much of a debate at all. Nearly all economists, of all political persuasions, agree that immigrants — those here legally or not — benefit the overall economy. “That is not controversial,” Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute, told me. Shierholz also said that “there is a consensus that, on average, the incomes of families in this country are increased by a small, but clearly positive amount, because of immigration.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/magazine/do-illegal-immigrants-actually-hurt-the-us-economy.html

 

[CiG]

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/magazine/do-illegal-immigrants-actually-hurt-the-us-economy.html

"Illegal immigration does have some undeniably negative economic effects. Similarly skilled native-born workers are faced with a choice of either accepting lower pay or not working in the field at all. Labor economists have concluded that undocumented workers have lowered the wages of U.S. adults without a high-school diploma — 25 million of them — by anywhere between 0.4 to 7.4 percent. The impact on everyone else, though, is surprisingly positive. Giovanni Peri, an economist at the University of California, Davis, has written a series of influential papers comparing the labor markets in states with high immigration levels to those with low ones. He concluded that undocumented workers do not compete with skilled laborers — instead, they complement them."

And this is where you'd think the left steps in and says "our unskilled and poor are more important than theirs."