Biden causes Crisis at the US-Mexico Border

[jusplay4fun]

U.S. detained nearly 100,000 migrants at Mexico border in February, sources say

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-border/u-s-detained-nearly-100000-migrants-at-mexico-border-in-february-sources-say-idUSKCN2AX2FE

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. border agents detained nearly 100,000 migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border in February, according to two people familiar with preliminary figures, the highest monthly total since a major border surge in mid-2019.

The figures, which have not been previously reported, show the scope of a growing migrant influx at the southwest border as U.S. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, seeks to roll back some of the restrictive policies of former President Donald Trump, a Republican. February was Biden’s first full month in office.

Last month’s total would represent the highest tally for the month of February since 2006. The sources who provided the figures to Reuters spoke on the condition of anonymity.

An increasing number of children arriving at the border without a parent or legal guardian has forced U.S. officials in recent weeks to scramble for housing options and take steps to speed up their release to sponsors in the United States.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/09/politics/100000-migrants-encountered-us-mexico-border/index.html

(CNN)US authorities arrested and encountered more than 100,000 migrants on the US-Mexico border over the past four weeks ending on March 3, according to data obtained by CNN, marking the highest levels for the same time frame in five years.

The number of migrants arrested on the southern border has been increasing in recent weeks, causing alarm among officials as they scramble to provide resources for the increase in minors and families who are unlawfully crossing into the US.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/02/13/biden-immigration-plan-creates-confusion-us-mexico-border/6729933002/

'It's life or death': Migrants desperately wait for Biden immigration policy changes at US-Mexico border

President Joe Biden’s administration has announced in recent weeks a series of immigration-related executive orders and memoranda aimed at reversing many of former President Donald Trump’s restrictive immigration policies. But at the border, migrants’ soaring hopes in Biden’s election are fizzling to frustration as the White House has indicated policies will be rolled out slowly amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Bumps in immigration policy shifts are common when new administrations take over, said Theresa Brown, director of immigration and cross-border policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington-based think tank. But few transitions have been so starkly different than the one between Biden and Trump, making rollout trickier, she said.

also, you can read:
https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/migrants-us-border-how-bidens-approach-differs-trumps

[jusplay4fun]

Psaki says 'large flow' of child migrants coming to US, denies border is 'open'

More than 100,000 migrants were encountered in February

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/psaki-child-migrants-denies-border-is-open

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Thursday said that there is a "large flow" of child migrants coming to the United States, but denied that the southern border is open -- after stats showing the scale of the migrant surge were released.

Psaki spoke a day after Customs and Border Protection announced that the agency encountered 100,441 individuals in February, a 28% increase over January, the agency said. Of those, 19,246 individuals were in family units; 9,457 were unaccompanied children (UACs) and 71,598 were single adults.

She pointed out that the majority of those encountered were turned away via Title 42 health protections put in place during the last administration.

"We certainly also recognize because the president and our administration has made a decision that the way to humanely approach immigration is to allow for unaccompanied children to come and be treated with humanity and be in a safe place while we’re... trying to get them into homes and sponsors homes that some more may be come to our border," Psaki said.

She continued: "And there have been, of course, a large flow of children across the border, we recognize that -- but we made a policy decision because we felt it was the humane approach."

The Biden administration has refused to call the dramatic increase in migrants -- particularly child migrants, who cannot be expelled under Title 42 -- a crisis.

[jusplay4fun]

NOTE that this immigration problem is one of the BIG reasons that Donald Trump won the presidential election in 2016. The problem has not disappeared and now, imo, President Biden has made it worse.

Biden must "fix" this problem before it gets worse. Can he? Will he? I am not holding my breath. It seems that the Biden Administration is not prepared for this surge. Are they SURPRISED?

We in the USA do not have the resources, money and jobs for every poor person in Latin America to enter the USA, legally or illegally. But the way Democrats spend money, they do not see this as a crises.

ALSO: Typical of Saxitoxin, he has to post about this topic in the wrong thread, about Dr. Seuss and book burning. Hence I started a post on this topic. Here is what he posted elsewhere:

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=235625

Re: The BOOK Burnings have began...
Post by saxitoxin on Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:32 am

President Harris has now reactivated several Trump initiatives (initiatives she initially cancelled) to deal with the swirling chaos at the border she created ---

DHS begs for volunteers to rush to border, admits migrant surge is 'overwhelming'

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Monday begged for volunteers from agencies within his department to rush to the border to help with an “overwhelming” surge of illegal immigrants.

In an email to department employees, Mr. Mayorkas said he was copying an idea the Trump administration used in 2019, during the last surge.

“Today I activated the Volunteer Force to support Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as they face a surge in migration along the Southwest Border,” Mr. Mayorkas wrote in his note.

He pointed to the 900 employees who stepped forward in 2019 and asked for a similar effort.

“It is astonishing that instead of actually trying to stop the surge, the secretary of Homeland Security is focused on bringing in volunteers under a Trump program to manage it,” said Rosemary Jenks, vice president at NumbersUSA, which advocates for stricter immigration limits.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... rge-migra/

[Dukasaur]

We in the USA do not have the resources, money and jobs for every poor person in Latin America to enter the USA, legally or illegally.

The idea that immigration is a cost is bad economics. An influx of highly motivated cheap labour always results in vast increases in productivity, resulting in a net benefit for the host country.

The rise of Britain as a world power can be traced back to the influx of refugees fleeing Europe's religious wars in the 16th century. The rise of the U.S. as a world power can be traced to an influx of refugees fleeing Europe's dynastic wars in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Of course, there can be short-term frictional costs. Newly-arriving refugees may need subsidized health care and housing for a short time. Refugee communities can be havens for gangs as unemployed youth are recruited into criminal organizations. These growing pains are brief. The costs to the public purse generally are reversed within a couple of years as the new arrivals find their way into the workforce, and within a couple of years are paying far more in income tax than they received in benefits. Social problems can persist in isolated ghettoes, but wherever migrants are accepted and integrated into general society those problems rapidly disappear.

Look back at the "sky is falling" headlines from Europe's refugee crisis of 2014 and 2015. Today, the sky has not fallen, the majority of the migrants have been integrated into society, and Europe's economy is going strong. (It's hard to separate good data from the background noise of the covid hangover, but until the covid lockdowns started Europe's GDP was rising about 1.25% annually.)

Xenophobes want you to keep your eyes focused on the problems, but any balanced look will show you that the downsides of immigration are always outweighed by the upsides.
https://voxeu.org/article/immigration-and-economic-prosperity

We find that both high- and low-skill migrants raise labour productivity. There is no evidence of major physical or human capital dilution, as investment adjusts over time to the larger pool of workers, and migrants are increasingly high-skilled. Instead, our results suggest that the complementarities that earlier analyses uncovered mostly at the micro level are also relevant at the macro level. The evidence from the microeconomic literature suggests that the positive productivity effects come from increased TFP and human capital. High-skilled migrants contribute to productivity directly, including through innovation, and indirectly through their positive spillovers on native workers. Low- and medium-skilled migrants can also contribute to aggregate productivity, to the extent that their skills are complementary to those of natives, promoting occupational reallocation and task specialisation. For instance:

Migrants can take jobs in sectors for which natives are in short supply, such as in agriculture, nursing, housekeeping, and landscaping. Without migrants, natives would have to be incentivised to provide these essential services, and the result would be lower supply at higher cost.
When migrants take up more manual routine jobs, natives move to perform more complex tasks (associated with abstract and communication skills), which promotes their skill upgrading (D’Amuri and Peri 2014).
Last but not least, there are complementarities between low-skilled migrants and high-skilled native females. In fact, we find empirical support for this so-called ‘nanny effect’ – when help from low-skilled migrants is available – through greater availability of childcare and household services, then native women – especially those with higher skills – increase their labour supply (Cortés and Tessada 2011).

[jusplay4fun]

first:
What many forget is the COST of these immigrants in terms of those factors: health care, schools, housing, food (Food Stamps or NOW called EBT). One hundred years ago and more, immigrants came (mostly) to Ellis Island and had to be LEGALLY allowed in. They had to pass the test for MOSTLY Health (as I understand it).

Once here, there was NO SOCIAL NET of welfare, housing, EBT, etc. Either the immigrant worked and survived or did not WITHOUT government help. The family, community, and churches helped. Also, America needed those with no special skills BECAUSE there were JOBS AVAILABLE for most of the immigrants. THOSE JOBS are NOT there NOW. PERIOD.

We cannot house and feed everyone from Mexico or Hondouras or El Salvador. AND we have too many social needs of our OWN LEGAL citizens NOW. These FACTS are ignored by those who basically want OPEN borders and to "Abolish ICE"....totally ridiculous.

second:
Duk speaks of "

highly motivated cheap labour

Duk ignores the social costs in the USA (and I assume in Canada and other "developed" nations) of schools, health care, food, and housing, as well as unemployment PROVIDED by GOVERNMENT via higher taxes, if the liberal BOTHER TO FUND such services.

Yes, the workers (with low skills) may be motivated to work hard, but there are family members that will qualify for the services I have already mentioned. These are costs.

I am not against immigration and I am not a xenophobe, so do not try to lump my arguments with those who are. I definitely recognize the value of immigrants, especially those who work hard. I want them SIMPLY to be LEGAL. PERIOD.

Part 3

AND Liberal Lawyers and activists go to Mexico and COACH these ILLEGALs to ask for Asylum.

They want to escape gun and gang violence in Mexico, El Salvador, and other Central American countries. That may be an excuse or reason. BUT: We have THOSE same issues in some inner cities. Anyone seen the crime and murder rates in Chicago? And that is not the ONLY PLACE.

And if we have detentions centers that are FULL, why cannot we NOT SAY, SORRY, FULL. Try again LATER. WHY DO WE spend more $$$, BIG MONEY, (THAT WE BORROW) for THOSE NOT LEGALLY here?

We in the USA do not have the resources, money and jobs for every poor person in Latin America to enter the USA, legally or illegally.

The idea that immigration is a cost is bad economics. An influx of highly motivated cheap labour always results in vast increases in productivity, resulting in a net benefit for the host country.

The rise of Britain as a world power can be traced back to the influx of refugees fleeing Europe's religious wars in the 16th century. The rise of the U.S. as a world power can be traced to an influx of refugees fleeing Europe's dynastic wars in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Of course, there can be short-term frictional costs. Newly-arriving refugees may need subsidized health care and housing for a short time. Refugee communities can be havens for gangs as unemployed youth are recruited into criminal organizations. These growing pains are brief. The costs to the public purse generally are reversed within a couple of years as the new arrivals find their way into the workforce, and within a couple of years are paying far more in income tax than they received in benefits. Social problems can persist in isolated ghettoes, but wherever migrants are accepted and integrated into general society those problems rapidly disappear.

Look back at the "sky is falling" headlines from Europe's refugee crisis of 2014 and 2015. Today, the sky has not fallen, the majority of the migrants have been integrated into society, and Europe's economy is going strong. (It's hard to separate good data from the background noise of the covid hangover, but until the covid lockdowns started Europe's GDP was rising about 1.25% annually.)

Xenophobes want you to keep your eyes focused on the problems, but any balanced look will show you that the downsides of immigration are always outweighed by the upsides.
https://voxeu.org/article/immigration-and-economic-prosperity

We find that both high- and low-skill migrants raise labour productivity. There is no evidence of major physical or human capital dilution, as investment adjusts over time to the larger pool of workers, and migrants are increasingly high-skilled. Instead, our results suggest that the complementarities that earlier analyses uncovered mostly at the micro level are also relevant at the macro level. The evidence from the microeconomic literature suggests that the positive productivity effects come from increased TFP and human capital. High-skilled migrants contribute to productivity directly, including through innovation, and indirectly through their positive spillovers on native workers. Low- and medium-skilled migrants can also contribute to aggregate productivity, to the extent that their skills are complementary to those of natives, promoting occupational reallocation and task specialisation. For instance:

Migrants can take jobs in sectors for which natives are in short supply, such as in agriculture, nursing, housekeeping, and landscaping. Without migrants, natives would have to be incentivised to provide these essential services, and the result would be lower supply at higher cost.
When migrants take up more manual routine jobs, natives move to perform more complex tasks (associated with abstract and communication skills), which promotes their skill upgrading (D’Amuri and Peri 2014).
Last but not least, there are complementarities between low-skilled migrants and high-skilled native females. In fact, we find empirical support for this so-called ‘nanny effect’ – when help from low-skilled migrants is available – through greater availability of childcare and household services, then native women – especially those with higher skills – increase their labour supply (Cortés and Tessada 2011).

[jusplay4fun]

To support my earlier stated point:

A comprehensive report by the Federation for Immigration Reform (FAIR) breaks down the cost of illegal immigration to U.S. taxpayers: $115.9 billion annually.

Based on the most recent data reported in 2017, The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigrants examines the fiscal impact of illegal immigration in federal and state budgets. It also highlights which U.S. citizens pay the most: Californians, Texans and Floridians.

The estimated coast to California taxpayers for more than six million illegal immigrants and their children is more than $23 billion.

The estimated cost to Texans for the more than four million illegal immigrants and their children is nearly $11 billion.

https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/report-illegal-immigration-costs-taxpayers-116-billion-annually-californians-texans-floridians-pay-the-most/article_f942e522-c5b0-11e9-93e6-0ff213e44ae5.html

more, from same source:

“Illegal aliens are net consumers of taxpayer-funded services and the limited taxes paid by some segments of the illegal alien population are, in no way, significant enough to offset the growing financial burdens [they] impose on U.S. taxpayers,” the report states.

The report calculates taxpayer burden by adding total federal, state and local expenditures, and adding total federal, state and local taxes paid by illegal immigrants. It relies on federal, state and local tax and resident demographics data, and outlines its proportional calculations and methodology.

For example, using a 2010 Social Security Administration report that estimated illegal immigrants paid a total of $13 billion into the fund annually, FAIR calculated by percentages of payments and dollar amounts paid that illegal immigrants also contributed $5.9 billion toward Medicare.

Its examination of federal budget money spent on illegal immigration was about $46 billion, with some state budgets spending an estimated $89 billion annually, FAIR calculates.

The annual bill of $135 billion equates to more than $8,000 per illegal immigrant and dependent, per year. While some illegal immigrants do pay certain taxes, the report states, many employers pay them lower wages, or in cash, and do not deduct their wages from payroll taxes, with most of their income unlikely being reported to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), FAIR states. Due to these varying factors, FAIR argues the federal, state and local governments are not collecting enough taxes from illegal immigrants to cover the costs of federal benefits they receive.

FAIR estimates that illegal immigrants pay nearly $19 billion in combined state, local, and federal taxes, or 14 percent of the amount spent annually on them.

FAIR now estimates that there are about 12.5 million illegal immigrants based on available data from the Department of Homeland Security, other federal and state government agencies, and research compiled by think tanks, universities and other research organizations.

The total national illegal immigrant estimate includes about 11 million adults of whom 350,000 receive Temporary Protective Status (mostly Central Americans), and 730,000 are DACA recipients.

The ten states with the largest estimated illegal alien populations account for nearly three-fourths (73.7 percent) of the national total. They are Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Texas and Washington.

also, from old report: https://cis.org/Report/Costs-Immigration

California estimated state and local governments spent $2.95 billion in FY -93 on illegal aliens and their U.S. citizen children for Medicaid, corrections, primary and secondary education and AFDC. Spending of state and local funds on four programs for refugees and their children reached $885 million. Amnestied aliens and their children required total state and local outlays for AFDC, Medicaid and the state share of supplemental security income (SSI) of $520 million. Total spending in the five programs assessed for these three populations was estimated at $4.34 billion. Costs of public education for children of refugees and amnestied aliens were not included.

[jusplay4fun]

another source to support my assertion:

Most economists agree that illegal immigrants impose a net fiscal
cost on American government and American taxpayers. This is not because
they are illegal immigrants per se, nor does it indicate that illegal
immigrants contribute nothing to our economy. Rather, illegal
immigrants represent a net loss to the U.S. economy because they
generally consume more in government benefits than they pay in taxes.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHR ... g29329.htm

from:

HOW DOES ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IMPACT AMERICAN TAXPAYERS AND WILL THE
REID-KENNEDY AMNESTY WORSEN THE BLOW?

=======================================================================

HEARING


BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

[Dukasaur]

first:
What many forget is the COST of these immigrants in terms of those factors: health care, schools, housing, food

Not sure which "many" forget those costs. Certainly everyone I know is aware of them. As I pointed out above, I fully acknowledge that there are short-term costs in welcoming immigrants. It's just that in the long run, these costs are far outweighed by the benefits.

One hundred years ago and more, immigrants came (mostly) to Ellis Island and had to be LEGALLY allowed in.

These were the laws they had to satisfy:

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Alien Contract Labor laws of 1885 and 1887 prohibited certain laborers from immigrating to the United States. The general Immigration Act of 1882 levied a head tax of fifty cents on each immigrant and blocked (or excluded) the entry of idiots, lunatics, convicts, and persons likely to become a public charge.

That's all. No Chinese, no idiots, no criminals, no unemployables, and you have to be able to pay fifty cents to cover the cost of processing you in. Sensible laws, except for the first one.

That is not what is happening today. Today, people who are completely sane, healthy, law-abiding, hard-working and ready to support themselves are being excluded. Not sensible.

Once here, there was NO SOCIAL NET of welfare, housing, EBT, etc. Either the immigrant worked and survived or did not WITHOUT government help.

That was true of everyone, whether immigrant or not. The social safety net we enjoy nowadays did not exist 100 years ago. We live in a kindler, gentler world, and I'll posit that it's a good thing. You may think it's a bad thing. Fair enough, we can agree to disagree on that. Either way, though, whether someone is an immigrant or not is completely irrelevant to that statement. The world of 100 years ago was harsher, to everyone, whether locally born-and-raised or just off the boat.

THOSE JOBS are NOT there NOW.

Not sure what you mean by "now". There is a momentary blip due to Covid, and there are periodically downturns due to various recessions and stuff, but overall the story of the last 50 years is the story of a long, sustained boom economy with a chronic labour shortage. Every businessman I've ever talked to -- and I've talked to hundreds over the years, in many different fields, farmers, building contractors, software designers, publishers, bar owners, retailers, etc., etc., -- talks about the difficulties in finding help. Everywhere I've ever gone I've seen 'Help Wanted' signs on every street (well, obviously excepting a few ghettoes like South Bend, Indiana). I'm not sure where you live, but 99% of the places that I've been a shortage of labour is more of a problem than a shortage of jobs.

In any case, Say's Law still holds. Production, not consumption, is the limiting factor in the economy. Having more people to work results in more production. There's never any lack of consumption.

another source to support my assertion:

Most economists agree that illegal immigrants impose a net fiscal cost on American government and American taxpayers.

The "source" you're quoting there is Jim Sensenbrenner, one of the most extremist hard-right Republicans, co-author of the "Patriot Act", the most vicious attack on civil liberties in American history. No surprise that a right-wing extremist would say such things, but they're just not true. What most economists actually agree on:
https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-effects-of-immigration-on-the-united-states-economy

Economic analysis finds little support for the view that inflows of foreign labor have reduced jobs or Americans’ wages. Economic theory predictions and the bulk of academic research confirms that wages are unaffected by immigration over the long-term and that the economic effects of immigration are mostly positive for natives and for the overall economy.

[jusplay4fun]

Duk, you totally disregarded my argument and posted this quote:

Economic analysis finds little support for the view that inflows of foreign labor have reduced jobs or Americans’ wages. Economic theory predictions and the bulk of academic research confirms that wages are unaffected by immigration over the long-term and that the economic effects of immigration are mostly positive for natives and for the overall economy.

And attacking ONE of my sources does not negate my argument.

My argument is not about wages or lost jobs. My argument is the SOCIAL cost of poor uneducated and unskilled people from poor countries. I never claimed (yet) that they are not willing to work.

I think you said the eventually that immigrants is a net gain; that is very likely, BUT the cost in the short term is very high for all those benefits I mentioned. That argument (net positive impact), I think, assumes a reasonable sustainable rate of immigration and THAT IS NOT what is occurring NOW at the US Southern border.

As I recall, you did not effectively argue against those social costs that I mentioned.

[ASIDE: There was ONE story about one handicapped woman from a Central American country trying to get into the USA; I am not sure where she can readily find a job and she seems destined to draw MORE from the US than she contributes. I imagine there are many more handicapped immigrants, but I do not have STATS on this. Also, if this woman had no husband, and, as I recall, had children, she will draw social benefits and not contribute to society as a net gain.]

SOCIAL Costs: Schools, AFDC (welfare), housing, food (via EBT), medical costs and care. These are what offsets any taxes they may pay. I think one source I quoted said that illegal immigrants pay few taxes, so that their contributions there to offset Social costs is rather minimal. As long as these immigrants have illegal status, they do not pay many taxes, beyond sales tax.

DO you want 1-5 million illegal immigrants in Canada (I assume that you live there and not in South Bend, Indiana) ? What will the impact of a significant part of those illegal immigrants on your local community?

Of course society is different now, I did not ignore that point. THAT is my point, the society has changed so that those in the country get many benefits AND result in high social costs. I go to hospitals that say that you cannot be denied care due to immigration status. There are signs that say that posted as one registers in both English and Spanish. SO there are medical costs and WHO pays for that? not the illegal immigrants.

That was true of everyone, whether immigrant or not. The social safety net we enjoy nowadays did not exist 100 years ago. We live in a kindler, gentler world, and I'll posit that it's a good thing. You may think it's a bad thing. Fair enough, we can agree to disagree on that. Either way, though, whether someone is an immigrant or not is completely irrelevant to that statement. The world of 100 years ago was harsher, to everyone, whether locally born-and-raised or just off the boat.

And you have to quote laws from the 1800s? Really? I was a bit reluctant to quote studies from 2006.

These were the laws they had to satisfy:
The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Alien Contract Labor laws of 1885 and 1887 prohibited certain laborers from immigrating to the United States. The general Immigration Act of 1882 levied a head tax of fifty cents on each immigrant and blocked (or excluded) the entry of idiots, lunatics, convicts, and persons likely to become a public charge.

Liberals have no concept of economic balance and JUS spend money they and we do not have, so they see NO (apparent) harm in this expenditure and massive more debt. The harm is to my children and grandchildren (and all in those future generations). They will be burdened with massive debts to pay JUS the INTEREST on; that ignores the PRINCIPAL, which likely NEVER be paid back.

And, as I quoted, many illegal immigrants NOW are children, and they will not pay taxes for several years.

In fiscal year 2020, the government’s net outlays for interest totaled $345 billion, equal to 1.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and accounting for 5.3 percent of total spending.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56910#:~:text=In%20fiscal%20year%202020%2C%20the,5.3%20percent%20of%20total%20spending.

same source indicate the VERY LIKELY rise of this amount that needs to be PAID in the Federal Budget:

What Are CBO’s Projections of Net Interest?
In the Congressional Budget Office’s most recent projections, which incorporate the assumption that current laws governing revenues and spending generally remain the same, the cumulative deficit from 2021 through 2030 totals nearly $13 trillion. Borrowing to finance that deficit—at a time when interest rates are expected to rise—would cause net interest outlays to more than double over the next 10 years, from an estimated $290 billion in 2021 to $664 billion in 2030.

As far as jobs being available, I think that our unemployment benefits are TOO GENEROUS and therefore too many sit at home drawing such benefits rather than getting a job at entry level wages and filling many of those jobs. I know personally two young people who did that, as long as they were getting an EXTRA $600 per week from the Federal budget on top of state unemployment benefits. AS of today, Federal extra benefits is now at $300 in the last bill passed and signed. SO rather than taking jobs and paying taxes, Democrats give an incentive to sit at home and do NOTHING and NOT pay taxes.

At one point the Congressional Democrats wanted to extend unemployment benefits from some 50 weeks to 100 weeks, PRE-COVID. That measure was defeated in 2018 or 2019, as I best recall. Unemployment benefits are too generous.

jusplay4fun wrote:
THOSE JOBS are NOT there NOW.

Not sure what you mean by "now". There is a momentary blip due to Covid, and there are periodically downturns due to various recessions and stuff, but overall the story of the last 50 years is the story of a long, sustained boom economy with a chronic labour shortage. Every businessman I've ever talked to -- and I've talked to hundreds over the years, in many different fields, farmers, building contractors, software designers, publishers, bar owners, retailers, etc., etc., -- talks about the difficulties in finding help. Everywhere I've ever gone I've seen 'Help Wanted' signs on every street (well, obviously excepting a few ghettoes like South Bend, Indiana). I'm not sure where you live, but 99% of the places that I've been a shortage of labour is more of a problem than a shortage of jobs.


In any case, Say's Law still holds. Production, not consumption, is the limiting factor in the economy. Having more people to work results in more production. There's never any lack of consumption.

And some of the jobs to which you allude cannot be filled by illegal immigrants with little skill, little education, and little knowledge of the English language. They cannot fill those jobs. HENCE: those jobs are not there now.

I can quote lots, and I will provide this link that supports most of my points about employment:

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.nr0.htm


Here is the overall projection:

EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS -- 2019–2029


Employment is projected to grow from 162.8 million to 168.8 million over the 2019–29
decade, an increase of 6.0 million jobs, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported
today. This reflects an annual growth rate of 0.4 percent, slower than the 2009-19
annual growth rate of 1.3 percent, which was bolstered by recovery from the 2007-09
Great Recession.

Occupational Employment

--Occupational groups in which employment is projected to grow markedly faster than the
average include healthcare support occupations, community and social service occupations,
and computer and mathematical occupations.

--Healthcare occupations and those associated with healthcare (including mental health)
account for 13 of the 30 fastest growing occupations from 2019 to 2029. Demand for
healthcare services by aging baby boomers, along with people who have chronic conditions,
will drive the projected employment growth.

--Several of the fastest growing healthcare occupations--including nurse practitioners,
occupational therapy assistants, and physician assistants--are projected to be in greater
demand as team-based healthcare models are increasingly used to deliver healthcare services.

--Computer occupations are expected to see fast job growth as strong demand is expected for
IT security and software development, and as new products associated with the Internet of
Things (IoT) are developed. These occupations include software developers as well as
information security analysts.

Bottom line: there are not enough jobs for all those immigrants trying to illegally enter the USA.

okay. let me post this now....I will take a break from my research and proofreading this.

[jusplay4fun]

Exclusive: 'Migrant president' Biden stirs Mexican angst over boom time for gangs

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico’s government is worried the new U.S. administration’s asylum policies are stoking illegal immigration and creating business for organized crime, according to officials and internal assessments seen by Reuters.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-mexico-exclusive/exclusive-migrant-president-biden-stirs-mexican-angst-over-boom-time-for-gangs-idUSKBN2B21D8

--Ever since President Joe Biden won the White House vowing to undo the hardline approach of his predecessor Donald Trump, Mexico has both looked forward to an end to migration burdens imposed by Trump, and braced for a new influx of people.

Detentions on the U.S border have surged since Biden took office on Jan. 20. Mexico has urged Washington to help stem the flow by providing development aid to Central America, from where most migrants come, driven by a humanitarian crisis.

“They see him as the migrant president, and so many feel they’re going to reach the United States,” Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said of Biden the morning after a virtual meeting with his U.S. counterpart on March 1.

“We need to work together to regulate the flow, because this business can’t be tackled from one day to the next.”

Previously unreported details in the internal assessments, based on testimonies and intelligence gathering, state that gangs are diversifying methods of smuggling and winning clients as they eye U.S. measures that will “incentivize migration.”

[saxitoxin]

“I did not make it,” she sobbed into the phone as she spoke with her husband, a butcher in Chicago.

“Biden promised us!” wailed another woman.

Mr. Biden is now directing the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help manage the thousands of unaccompanied migrant children who are filling up detention facilities after Mr. Biden said, shortly after taking office, that his administration would no longer turn back unaccompanied minors.

https://nyti.ms/3bMm513

Welcome to Biden's America, honey!

[DoomYoshi]

We in the USA do not have the resources, money and jobs for every poor person in Latin America to enter the USA, legally or illegally.

The idea that immigration is a cost is bad economics. An influx of highly motivated cheap labour always results in vast increases in productivity, resulting in a net benefit for the host country.

The idea that growth is good for the country is bad economics.

Manhattan used to be the most beautiful piece of land imaginable, with thousands of deer, beavers, wolves and scores of fish swimming the river. Then the immigrants showed up, and now it's an uninhabitable piece of garbage worth nothing. Yet still somehow, if it was a country, it would be bigger than all but the G20.

[jusplay4fun]

DY,

Your post (below) is unclear, confusing, and contains bad analysis and/or preposterous statements.

Bigger than all but the G20? In terms of what? economic power/wealth? surely not population or land area. And any wealth is bad, by ITSELF?

So based on your comments, I assume that you would prefer the earth to be inhabited by humans living in caves and being hunter-gatherers and NO civilization? Most dying by 40 and struggling for the next meal most of the time. TO NOT KNOW Jesus and carpentry and having herds and fields to harvest? All this to keep Manhattan island pristine? (and other places, too?)

And I take issue to say that Manhattan is "uninhabitable". How many live there now? Your very statement is false (see below). How much of your other posts are JUS as "credible"?

Manhattan/Population
1.632 million (2019)

AND I did not even challenge your statement that growth is bad. How much credence can I put on that statement, based on what I already posted here in response to your previous post?

DY, Please do a better job of refutation, OR I will consider you NOT WORTH even reading.

We in the USA do not have the resources, money and jobs for every poor person in Latin America to enter the USA, legally or illegally.

The idea that immigration is a cost is bad economics. An influx of highly motivated cheap labour always results in vast increases in productivity, resulting in a net benefit for the host country.

The idea that growth is good for the country is bad economics.

Manhattan used to be the most beautiful piece of land imaginable, with thousands of deer, beavers, wolves and scores of fish swimming the river. Then the immigrants showed up, and now it's an uninhabitable piece of garbage worth nothing. Yet still somehow, if it was a country, it would be bigger than all but the G20.

[jusplay4fun]

DHS Secretary Mayorkas grilled by lawmakers over border crisis

Mayorkas' testimony comes a day after he said the U.S. is on pace to reach the highest number of apprehensions at the border in 20 years.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/dhs-secretary-mayorkas-faces-lawmakers-amid-humanitarian-crisis-border-n1261289

March 17, 2021, 9:54 AM EDT / Updated March 17, 2021, 1:30 PM EDT
By Rebecca Shabad
WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas faced hours of tough questioning from lawmakers Wednesday on how the Biden administration is handling the growing humanitarian crisis at the U.S. southern border.


Republicans on the House Homeland Security Committee spent the hearing blaming the administration’s immigration policies for the significant increase in people apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border over the last two months.

Democrats, meanwhile, said the situation is a product of the Trump administration’s hard-line immigration rules.

Responding to GOP criticism that the U.S. border is effectively open, Mayorkas clearly stated the “border is secure and the border is not open,” but acknowledged a “surge of individuals attempting to cross the border,” a situation that he called “undoubtedly difficult.”

“Most are single adults who are expelled within hours back to Mexico, pursuant to the CDC's public health authority," Mayorkas said in opening remarks, referring to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Families who are apprehended at the border are also immediately expelled under the same public health authority unless we confront, at times, a limitation on Mexico's capacity to receive them.” testimony comes a day after he said the U.S. is on pace to reach the highest number of apprehensions at the border in 20 years.


Mayorkas said the U.S. is “encountering many unaccompanied children, children who arrive without a parent or legal guardian with them. Their families made the heart-wrenching decision to send them on a journey across Mexico to provide them with a better, safer future.”

Rep. John Katko, R-N.Y., the ranking member on the committee, said he thinks the humanitarian crisis could have been avoided, and implied that the Biden administration is encouraging people to enter the U.S. illegally.

"Through irresponsible rhetoric and actions by this administration, we are seeing an unprecedented crisis unfold during a pandemic," Katko said. "The situation at the border continues to get worse every day with inadequate action or even proper acknowledgment of the severity of the situation."

Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, a former chairman of the panel, echoed the claim, saying the Biden administration is incentivizing people to cross the border by making them think “the United States is open for business again.” The Trump administration “did a masterful job” in its messages of deterrence to prevent people from entering the country, he said.

Mayorkas replied, “Sometimes, the tools of deterrence defy values and principles for which we all stand. And one of those tools of deterrence that the Trump administration employed was deplorable and absolutely unacceptable.”

[jusplay4fun]

Biden Official Tells Migrants ‘Now Is Not the Time’ to Come to U.S.

https://news.yahoo.com/biden-official-tells-migrants-now-143841757.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAKKmp0JXdoJKkQxNNLYQAtrptEaeige4vdJi4Yv6UBeLvOmFWlxjKE2IbAAJCC_chB04KPWKhAidQQlcp-S4z1wnqa4e6Sf6rqHJeEioJkbdn95Vz8eVeJAOzH6oGIzx4cUJOJHCY064IGWi03YTyfi2GO4BCTbSvtB4Oh7356Cw

A senior Biden transition official is warning migrants hoping to cross the southern border into the U.S. during the early days of the new administration that “now is not the time” to come.

“There’s help on the way, but now is not the time to make the journey,” an unnamed Biden official said, NBC News reported.

The Biden administration is looking to end the Trump administration’s policy of requiring that migrants wait in Mexico as immigration courts consider their asylum applications. Those who have been waiting at the border will be considered first for entry over migrants who only recently arrived. Additionally, the Biden administration will scrap the stricter restrictions the previous administration imposed on asylum seekers, which limit who is eligible for entry.

[ConfederateSS]

---------Duk, you gave examples of 16th ,18th and 19th cen...even The 20th cen...can be added to the U.S...With the 2 World Wars....You left out One Super Fact!!!!!....When those who came before.........Came...Worked hard..... That's How The West Was Won... ...In America...They came ,They worked hard....They did not come for free hand outs....They did everything on their own....Now the Democratic Party is waving a magic carrot, free everything....Heathcare ... housing... ...free money/food... ...to those who come....on the backs of Hard Working American Tax payers... ....just for party line votes... ......So,it it is no comparison to immigration of the past...Just another Democratic Party trick to get votes... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

------The funny thing is...The Left try and say Trump started something with words ,and tried to have him removed from office......When Biden has started an invasion...with words...go figure...

[mookiemcgee]

We in the USA do not have the resources, money and jobs for every poor person in Latin America to enter the USA, legally or illegally.

The idea that immigration is a cost is bad economics. An influx of highly motivated cheap labour always results in vast increases in productivity, resulting in a net benefit for the host country.

The idea that growth is good for the country is bad economics.

Manhattan used to be the most beautiful piece of land imaginable, with thousands of deer, beavers, wolves and scores of fish swimming the river. Then the immigrants showed up, and now it's an uninhabitable piece of garbage worth nothing. Yet still somehow, if it was a country, it would be bigger than all but the G20.

I like your new signature

[Dukasaur]

I sure hope you washed out your mouth with soap after talking so much shit. At least I hope you used breath mints.

Duk, you gave examples of 16th ,18th and 19th cen...even The 20th cen...can be added to the U.S...With the 2 World Wars....You left out One Super Fact!!!!!....When those who came before.........Came...Worked hard..... That's How The West Was Won... ...In America...They came ,They worked hard....They did not come for free hand outs....

Nobody is coming for free handouts. Now, just as in the past, immigrants are some of the hardest-working people in the country. That is one of the big reasons why immigration is so good for the rich countries. People born here are just too soft and comfortable. You have to come from a poor country and really know what hunger is to actually be driven to work as hard as they do.

For many years I delivered trees and shrubs, shuttling between farms and greenhouses all over Ontario and Quebec. Our agricultural system, just like yours, is based on migrant workers from Mexico. Just like you, we would starve to death if we didn't import Mexicans. There is nobody born in this country willing to do back-breaking labour like picking tomatoes. Anyway, I delivered trees and shrubs between growers, and I can tell you that when I came to a farm that was staffed with Mexicans, they would have my truck loaded or unloaded within 90 minutes. When I came to a farm that was staffed with locals, it would be a half day minimum. My heart always sank if I came to a farm and didn't see any Mexicans. I would know right there and then that I was in for a hard day. The Mexicans just do their job. The locals need to take a smoke break every 20 minutes, and then they need to take a piss break, and then they need to check their phones, and then they need to show each other the Trailer Park Boys video that their buddy just sent them. The Mexicans don't take smoke breaks, they don't take piss breaks, they don't check their phones, they don't watch Trailer Park Boys. They just DO THEIR FUCKING JOB.

I shit you not. A farm staffed with Mexicans would load or unload my truck in 90 minutes. A farm staffed with locals needed four or five hours to do the same thing. These are not flukes I'm talking about, these are reliable long-term averages that I calculated over several years in that particular trade. It burns me up to hear you right-wing assholes talking about "lazy Mexicans". Either you don't know what you're talking about or you're just plain lying. One Mexican is easily worth three white guys. Your agricultural system would come crashing down and everybody in your major cities would fucking starve to death if it wasn't for the dedication and hard work of the hard-working migrant labourer from Mexico who is up before sunrise every day during the harvest to pick your fruits and vegetables and keep your supermarket shelves full.

I don't know the meat side of agriculture as well as I know the vegetable side, but from things I've read it's similar.

Okay, that's that, but I'm not done. Don't forget I'm a refugee too, and I take it personally when people start shitting on refugees. In 1987 I worked on the construction of the SkyDome. Maybe you've heard of it. Was a bit of a big deal at the time, although it's already obsolete. I did concrete inspection, casting concrete samples. There were only three of us on the site, my supervisor who did jack shit, myself, who did quite a bit more, and the third one who did more than the other two combined. The third one was a guy from Biafra. I think of him as a kid because he was about 5'2" and weighed like 150 lbs., and he looked very young, but in actual fact he was older than I was. This guy had survived the Biafran War of Independence (don't know if you've old enough to remember, but to make a long story short, the Biafrans failed to win their independence, and the Nigerians slaughtered them by the millions.)

Anyway, this guy survived war and famine and flood and a government-engineered genocide, and he finally got out and came to Canada, and he was absolutely the personification of Gratitude, to Canada and to God and to his fellow man. Every single day he gave thanks to God for letting him live. He worked as hard as me and my useless supervisor combined and we could count on him any time of the day or night, and he was like I said about 150 pounds but he would throw a five gallon pail of wet concrete on to the tailgate of his truck and then grab my pail and get it for me. He would never shirk, never complain, never hide. And he put up with nasty comments and racist shit and never lash out, always turning the other cheek and wishing well to everyone.

I'm not done. I spent seven years as a sand camp foreman, and I was always hiring refugees, and they were always among my best drivers. From Poland and Iraq and Zimbabwe and Haiti, some of my best drivers ever. I had this one kid, Laguerre, he was a refugee from the civil war in Haiti, he was the only one in seven years I could trust to clean a truck properly. In seven fucking years he was the only one that would use one cloth to wash and a second cloth to rinse. Everybody else just uses one cloth, wash with it, squeeze it out and then rinse, or more often not rinse at all. "So clean you can eat off the floor" is just a cliche, and 99% of the time a bullshit exaggeration, but when Laguerre cleaned a truck it was literally true. The trucks he cleaned were so clean I literally would have been willing to eat a meal off the floor of them. You right-wing assholes talk about dirty immigrants, but some of the cleanest people I've met have been refugees.

I've been in this country 53 years now but don't forget I'm a refugee. I've met and/or worked with literally hundreds of refugees, and always, always, always, they work harder and complain less than local-born.

Do you seriously fucking think that somebody comes here dreaming of living in a ghetto and collecting welfare? You think this is the dream that sustains somebody who walks 2000 miles from Nicaragua to Texas, crossing mountains and deserts and dealing with extortionists and robbers and rapists? Really? Either you haven't got a clue or you're just plain lying. People who leave their home and their family behind, sell everything they own, and walk 2000 miles, are not doing it because they dream of sitting in a ghetto watching TV and waiting for a welfare cheque. These are some of the most passionately dedicated people you will ever see. They want, as much as any previous generation of immigrants, to work hard and make something of their lives.

Yeah, they won't all find a job on Day 1. Some of them might end up on welfare for a little while, but it isn't a long-term plan for any of them. These are hard-working, dedicated people, who will do whatever it takes to do something productive with their lives.

[jusplay4fun]

I never doubt the hard-working nature of nearly ALL immigrants. PERIOD. I will add that many immigrants who become citizens are some of the most loyal Americans who sincerely LOVE THIS COUNTRY. THAT IS ALL GREAT...!

My complaint is not about the worker, but against:

1) those who come illegally;

2) the family dependents who are receiving benefits, that I have already outlined. I do not say that they do not deserve the benefits, but that there is a HUGE social and actual financial cost to provide these BENEFITS. Those benefits seem to be GUARANTEED to them, as there is little to be done legally to deny benefits to ILLEGAL immigrants (referred to as "illegal aliens" in the past). We CANNOT pay for such HUGE and GENEROUS benefits to every illegal immigrant. Often those receiving such benefits are children and the wives and mothers.

As I said, there was a story I saw on the TV News of a handicap woman who wanted to go to the USA. How much work will she do? Will that work offset the costs of her many benefits. I DOUBT IT. And yes, that is ONLY ONE case, but how many others are similar? I doubt that she is the only such person. As I recall, she did not have a husband to help her and I thought she has 2 dependent and young children. So, as I see it, she will be very likely a welfare case who does NOT WORK a paid job.

3) FURTHER, I think the result of the changes made to immigration policy by the Biden Administration by Executive Action is to ENCOURAGE more ILLEGAL immigration. They want to say 1) it is not a crises and 2) that they deported MANY. THEY better deport many to KEEP more COVID cases (and other diseases) OUT. There are still many unaccompanied minors, that get IN. ONCE IN, their parents will likely CLAIM THAT THEY TOO deserve to be in the USA to claim and care for their children. THAT adds to the problem.

[jusplay4fun]

What is the impact economically of a HUGE influx of unskilled workers? Depressed wages if there is a MASSIVE number of NEW unskilled workers.

SIMPLE ECONOMICS: More supply lowers the prices; more such workers depress their wages. THAT impact? more difficult for all of them to get out of poverty.

AND I am sure that most immigrants do not come to the USA to get WELFARE (all those social benefits). BUT NOT all will get great paying jobs. So the cycle continues, as I outlined above. They will be poor and stay poor for a long time and therefore will draw from many expensive social programs.

As I said earlier, those illegals will not have the English skills for many of the jobs available. Because they are not LEGAL, I doubt they will pay many taxes. I have read NO REFUTATION of such points.

I think that the Hispanic migration will be a very good thing for the USA in the long run, but in the meantime, we keep adding to the deficit. AND those huge federal deficits will HURT THE USA in the long-term.

If one looks at the history and story of immigrants, many great scientists, writers, and artists are children of immigrants. Look at ALL the contributions of the Jewish immigration in the 20th century. And for another example, look who is now on the US Supreme Court. Mostly Catholics and Jews, who are children of immigrants or their grandchildren.

AND TO MOOKIE: Whose signature were you commenting on? You did not say specifically.

TO DUK: do you live NOW In the USA, for 53 years?

JP

[mookiemcgee]

It was @dooms sig....

Hunter S. Thompson wrote:
The Edge... There is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over..

@jusplay... let's be specific here. What taxes do you believe illegal immigrants don't pay? Which ones do you think they do pay?

In my experience 95% of illegal workers in the USA pay:
sales tax
state income tax (deducted directly from their checks via their employer)
federal income tax (deducted directly from their checks via their employer)

Specifically what social programs do you think illegal immigrants are draining?
They generally can't qualify for unemployment benefits
They don't qualify for most federal welfare programs, some states allow them to draw on state run programs, others do not.

Most of the 'burden' to the USA costs associated with illegal migrants are education based costs, and the whole bucket of costs associated with border security (patroling the border, housing jailed immigrants, legal costs associated with their cases)

if you look at this report,(https://www.fairus.org/sites/default/fi ... y_2010.pdf) which basically tries to factor in all conceivable costs (including things like costs for use of USA roads ect) shows (on page 42) that the net costs to the USA is around 20 billion/year. This doesn't factor in ANY of the benefit to the US economy from having skilled, inexpensive labor available. So the real question is does the US economy benefit more than 20 billion/year from having that labor. I would argue it does, and that this number is very small relative to the national debt and the benefit to US businesses.

[jusplay4fun]

They pay sales taxes, for sure. I do not know that they pay payroll taxes, as I think that many work "under the table" since they do not have legal status to get a job and to pay taxes (FICA and income taxes).

I did some further investigation; taxes, schools, and wage reductions:

IRS estimates that about 6 million unauthorized immigrants file individual income tax returns each year.[20] Research reviewed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office indicates that between 50 percent and 75 percent of unauthorized immigrants pay federal, state, and local taxes.

So Duk and I both need to amend our assumptions, based on the above quote, which is AN ESTIMATION.

Estimates indicate that about 4% of the school-age population is made up of children who are illegal immigrants.[26] Many require remedial assistance in language skills, which increases costs to the public schools. During April 2006, Standard & Poor's analysts wrote: "Local school districts are estimated to educate 1.8 million undocumented children. At an average annual cost of $7,500 (averages vary by jurisdiction) per student, the cost of providing education to these children is about $11.2 billion." Other estimates of the costs to educate unauthorized children and US-born children of unauthorized immigrants reached $30 billion in 200

9

Economists have different conclusions regarding the impact on wages from immigration, both legal and illegal. It is challenging to separate the impact of illegal immigration (generally workers with lower educational attainment) from immigration overall. Studies generally conclude there is a small adverse impact on the wages of lower-skilled workers from immigration and some benefit for higher-skilled workers:

It was @dooms sig....

Hunter S. Thompson wrote:
The Edge... There is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over..

@jusplay... let's be specific here. What taxes do you believe illegal immigrants don't pay? Which ones do you think they do pay?

In my experience 95% of illegal workers in the USA pay:
sales tax
state income tax (deducted directly from their checks via their employer)
federal income tax (deducted directly from their checks via their employer)

[mookiemcgee]

@JP4fun... in my experience most employer of illegal immigrants can't/won't pay them in cash. Modern accounting practices make it extremely difficult to do so. Employers for the most part want/need a social security number from a prospective employee. there is currently NO mandatory verification system for employers to confirm the employee matches the name of the SS number provided on their application. This is how 95% of illegal workers are employed in the USA, many pay the income tax and don't file taxes (no rebates/tax credits)

[jusplay4fun]

based on the one article I quoted from, you seem to be correct, Mookie.

JP

[mookiemcgee]

I edited my comment twice earlier, but I added a link to a report you might find enlightening. It's info from about 10 years ago, so the numbers may have changed but the underlying assumptions of how/what to calculate remain fairly accurate.