The wall costs the government $10 more than a large pizza.

[Stevicus]

No. It's the only source of information that has some reliability due to the training that academics usually go through.

I see your point, although when you wrote that, I was thinking of something my dad told me about why he started smoking. He said, "Back then, we didn't know that smoking was harmful." However, as a smoker myself, I think anyone could have had an inkling that it was probably harmful, but they could have plausible deniability and say "they didn't know" prior to the surgeon general putting out warnings and a plethora of studies on the matter.

My only point is that just because it may not be peer-reviewed or proven by science beyond the shadow of a doubt, it doesn't mean it should be rejected out of hand on that basis alone.

 

[Notanumber]

Politicians have no credentials and they do not tell the truth.
I only accept work that is done has part of a scientific study and published in a peer reviewed journals or academic books. Anything else I reject as unestablished opinions.

As my late father used to say, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

 

[sayak83]

I see your point, although when you wrote that, I was thinking of something my dad told me about why he started smoking. He said, "Back then, we didn't know that smoking was harmful." However, as a smoker myself, I think anyone could have had an inkling that it was probably harmful, but they could have plausible deniability and say "they didn't know" prior to the surgeon general putting out warnings and a plethora of studies on the matter.

My only point is that just because it may not be peer-reviewed or proven by science beyond the shadow of a doubt, it doesn't mean it should be rejected out of hand on that basis alone.

Yes. But I am not going to watch a 2 hr video from an uncredentialed source whom I can't fact check. That was the context of my reply.

 

[Notanumber]

Yes. But I am not going to watch a 2 hr video from an uncredentialed source whom I can't fact check. That was the context of my reply.

According to the stats, 200,317 have watched at least part of it to date and it was only published on 12 Jan 2019.

 

[sayak83]

According to the stats, 200,317 have watched at least part of it to date and it was only published on 12 Jan 2019.

And an egg is the most liked Instagram picture.

 

[sayak83]

According to the stats, 200,317 have watched at least part of it to date and it was only published on 12 Jan 2019.

Meanwhile what actual economists think.
Here’s What’ll Happen to the Economy if We Deport Undocumented Immigrants

And here is more data driven analysis.

Fear vs. facts: Examining the economic impact of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. — Arizona State University

Conclusion of the paper is appended below,

Although there are costs associated with undocumented
immigrants living in the U.S., their overall economic contri-
butions, including employment, purchases, and tax revenue
generated may result in a financial benefit to the U.S. at the
federal level, and for some local and state governments as well
(Immigration Policy Center, 2010b, c; NCLR, 2008; Porter, 2005;
Strayhorn, 2006; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, n.d.). Even in
states where the costs of providing services to undocumented
inimigrants is greater than the tax revenue generated, those
costs represent less than 5% of those states' total budgets al-
located for law enforcement, education, and health care (CBO,
2007), and not the huge economic drain claimed by many poli-
ticians and anti-immigrant organizations. The negative de-
pictions of undocumented immigrants by the media and the
discussion by some politicians about the economic drain of un-
documented immigrants on the U.S. economy, which are based
on exaggerations, the distortion of data, or incomplete infor-
mation, have created a hostile environment for undocumented
Latinos in the U.S. (Becerra, 2012). This has led to ineffective
and costly policies that deny services to undocumented im-
migrants and increase immigration enforcement (CBO, 2008;
NCLR, 2008; Sommers, 2010; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, n.d.,
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2009, 2010).

 

[Notanumber]

Meanwhile what actual economists think.
Here’s What’ll Happen to the Economy if We Deport Undocumented Immigrants

And here is more data driven analysis.

Fear vs. facts: Examining the economic impact of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. — Arizona State University

Conclusion of the paper is appended below,

Although there are costs associated with undocumented
immigrants living in the U.S., their overall economic contri-
butions, including employment, purchases, and tax revenue
generated may result in a financial benefit to the U.S. at the
federal level, and for some local and state governments as well
(Immigration Policy Center, 2010b, c; NCLR, 2008; Porter, 2005;
Strayhorn, 2006; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, n.d.). Even in
states where the costs of providing services to undocumented
inimigrants is greater than the tax revenue generated, those
costs represent less than 5% of those states' total budgets al-
located for law enforcement, education, and health care (CBO,
2007), and not the huge economic drain claimed by many poli-
ticians and anti-immigrant organizations. The negative de-
pictions of undocumented immigrants by the media and the
discussion by some politicians about the economic drain of un-
documented immigrants on the U.S. economy, which are based
on exaggerations, the distortion of data, or incomplete infor-
mation, have created a hostile environment for undocumented
Latinos in the U.S. (Becerra, 2012). This has led to ineffective
and costly policies that deny services to undocumented im-
migrants and increase immigration enforcement (CBO, 2008;
NCLR, 2008; Sommers, 2010; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, n.d.,
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2009, 2010).

Is that the same as open borders?

BTW, 9,400 liked what they saw.

If you don’t want to watch the video, you can get a flavour by reading some of the comments.

 

[Mindmaster]

No. It's the only source of information that has some reliability due to the training that academics usually go through.

You mean the conditioning program and soul-selling?

Academics have repeatedly suppressed the truth in instances where it would cost them money, they feel bad admitting it, or it's against their beliefs. They are not immune to human biases, or beyond making mistakes -- or printing them, for that matter.

 

[ecco]

"President Trump is asking for $5.7 Billion, out of an annual budget of $4.407 Trillion.

In other words, Trump wants 57 bucks, out of an annual budget of $44,070.

But it's not "out of", it's "in addition to".

If Trump wanted to take it out of Homeland Security's budget that would be OK.

If Trump wanted to take it out of the Military's budget that would be OK.

In fact, that's what he talked about doing. Letting the Army Corps of Engineers build it with money already allocated to the Military. Why hasn't he pursued this? Could it be that the Generals have all indicated "not out of my share"?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes, slave labor is great for our economy, no doubt. But, the numbers in this report are rubbish. First, the place an American pays the most taxes is home ownership, illegals cannot own homes unless they're buying it with cash. (Hint: they're not.) Certainly, they're paying the same taxes on consumables (sales tax) etc, but what that amount is over a population is hard to say. (Who actually keeps track of that, themselves?)

And, no, if you are in most of the democratically run states you can easily get welfare and aid as an illegal alien.In Illinois, you can get public aid, a drivers license, and nearly anything else. All you really can't get is a social security card, and that doesn't matter if you want to keep working as a slave since no one will expect you to have one for those jobs anyway. In California, you can get even more -- it almost doesn't matter if you're illegal at all.

Anyway, this article completely conflates illegals with legal immigrants which annoys me, and is rubbish.

If our workforce shrank due to low birth rates, our salaries would go up -- it'd be a good thing, lol.

Hmm, so where is your study that you meticulously carried out? Or are we just taking your word for it?

 

[Mindmaster]

Hmm, so where is your study that you meticulously carried out? Or are we just taking your word for it?

Don't need a study for basic economics, supply and demand which are older than dirt. Of course, they don't teach that in school since about 30 years back, so I don't expect many of you to understand it.

Anyway, cheap (as in nearly free) labor will always undermine the native salary because labor is a resource people are competing for - if there is a surplus wages plummet, but cost of living doesn't necessarily match it because as long as their are enough "doing well" to sustain the prices of goods and real goods (like property) they will remain high. Most of the tax burden is on landowners, and well-to-do's in this country. So, that being said that's who's paying the bulk of the taxes. Most illegals are neither well to do or landowners, so percentage wise they're paying just about jack and **** of the taxes no matter what taxes they're paying. Average middle-class wage family is paying at least 15-20k a year on all of this.

So, the bottom line is an influx of illegal immigrants reduces the quality of life for American citizens even if they aren't involved in crime or making trouble. If you doubt that look at the wages in any country with a surplus of workers (China, India, or whatever) and you will find they all have extremely low pay for what they do.

 

[Notanumber]

You mean the conditioning program and soul-selling?

Academics have repeatedly suppressed the truth in instances where it would cost them money, they feel bad admitting it, or it's against their beliefs. They are not immune to human biases, or beyond making mistakes -- or printing them, for that matter.

If the Left do not like what they say, they can ruin them.

People like Stefan can be more independently minded.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

As my late father used to say, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

Dorothy Parker once famously quipped that you can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think.

 

[Notanumber]

Dorothy Parker once famously quipped that you can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think.

I had to look up an explanation to that.

Horticulture Pun – Quote Investigator

 

[Stevicus]

Meanwhile what actual economists think.
Here’s What’ll Happen to the Economy if We Deport Undocumented Immigrants

And here is more data driven analysis.

Fear vs. facts: Examining the economic impact of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. — Arizona State University

Conclusion of the paper is appended below,

Although there are costs associated with undocumented
immigrants living in the U.S., their overall economic contri-
butions, including employment, purchases, and tax revenue
generated may result in a financial benefit to the U.S. at the
federal level, and for some local and state governments as well
(Immigration Policy Center, 2010b, c; NCLR, 2008; Porter, 2005;
Strayhorn, 2006; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, n.d.). Even in
states where the costs of providing services to undocumented
inimigrants is greater than the tax revenue generated, those
costs represent less than 5% of those states' total budgets al-
located for law enforcement, education, and health care (CBO,
2007), and not the huge economic drain claimed by many poli-
ticians and anti-immigrant organizations. The negative de-
pictions of undocumented immigrants by the media and the
discussion by some politicians about the economic drain of un-
documented immigrants on the U.S. economy, which are based
on exaggerations, the distortion of data, or incomplete infor-
mation, have created a hostile environment for undocumented
Latinos in the U.S. (Becerra, 2012). This has led to ineffective
and costly policies that deny services to undocumented im-
migrants and increase immigration enforcement (CBO, 2008;
NCLR, 2008; Sommers, 2010; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, n.d.,
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2009, 2010).

I've read similar studies on this issue, but this is part of the reason our society has a somewhat conflicted view on this. It's also why we can't really come up with a coherent plan to deal with immigration, one way or the other. It's why so many undocumented workers are in a kind of legal limbo, since employers can take advantage of the situation by paying them very little under harsh working conditions, since they're under a constant threat of discovery and deportation.

What if our government decided to make them all legal and give them the same rights and protections as other workers? By all rights, they should, especially if these studies have merit and they're providing an economic benefit to society.

This is also an international issue, since a lot of these undocumented workers come from countries with significantly lower standards of living than we have in America or other Western countries. Then there's also the issue of free trade and outsourcing, through which Western economies have benefited from utilizing cheap labor overseas where the rules and standards regarding wages, safety, and working conditions do not apply.

If U.S. liberals were worth their salt, they would push for internationalizing labor unions and advocating for the same wages and working conditions for workers all across the world, whether they're in Mexico, Bangladesh, China, or anywhere else. They would advocate for cutting off trade with any and all nations which do not have the same wages and working conditions as U.S. workers. All these people talking it up about how the border wall is so immoral (which I agree that it is) should stop and consider the overall immorality of the current status quo. Few people actually stop to consider that if Mexico was forced to have a minimum wage and living standards comparable to that of the U.S. or other Western countries, there would be no need for any wall or the kinds of immigration enforcement decried in these studies you're citing.

The bottom line is that the entire world should have the same standard of living, working conditions, and wage levels across the board. That's the only moral solution that I can see. If people think that's too naive, unfeasible, or impractical, then they never should have brought up the issue in the first place. We might as well turn back the clock 100-150 years and go back to the days of imperialism, colonies, and sweatshops to achieve whatever "economic benefit" we wish to achieve. We have to choose either one or the other, but to do any less than that or maintain half-hearted measures in the current status quo is extremely hypocritical and wrong.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Don't need a study for basic economics, supply and demand which are older than dirt. Of course, they don't teach that in school since about 30 years back, so I don't expect many of you to understand it.

Anyway, cheap (as in nearly free) labor will always undermine the native salary because labor is a resource people are competing for - if there is a surplus wages plummet, but cost of living doesn't necessarily match it because as long as their are enough "doing well" to sustain the prices of goods and real goods (like property) they will remain high. Most of the tax burden is on landowners, and well-to-do's in this country. So, that being said that's who's paying the bulk of the taxes. Most illegals are neither well to do or landowners, so percentage wise they're paying just about jack and **** of the taxes no matter what taxes they're paying. Average middle-class wage family is paying at least 15-20k a year on all of this.

So, the bottom line is an influx of illegal immigrants reduces the quality of life for American citizens even if they aren't involved in crime or making trouble. If you doubt that look at the wages in any country with a surplus of workers (China, India, or whatever) and you will find they all have extremely low pay for what they do.

So ... take your word for it.

No thanks.

 

[Mindmaster]

So ... take your word for it.

No thanks.

This is when your natural skepticism takes you to the place where it's utility has been completely compromised, and you can't get out of the box?

We're just normal people here having a discussion, get over yourself. If you want academically sourced research and other people willing to do all that legwork for you, man did you come to the wrong bar.

RF is like one giant opinion piece, if you can't deal with that, maybe it's not your bag.

Similarly, my opinions and arguments aren't refuted merely because you fail to agree with them or they do not come from some "authority". Thoughts along these lines are just one big walking "genetic fallacy". Even the Joe on the street can make a valid point, and I just think you're deflecting, at this point.

 

[ecco]

He who makes assertions has the obligation of substantiating them. If he cannot substantiate them then he will become known as a fraud.