Posted on 08/31/2016 4:53:41 PM PDT by FightThoughtControl
The Immigration Shell Game: Why We Should Care About Overall Immigration
Let’s say I walk into a Ford dealership and say to the salesman, “I’ll give you X dollars for that Mustang over there.”
The salesman nervously wipes his brow and retorts, “X dollars! Mister, you’d be literally stealing the shirt off my back! I can’t do X dollars.”
I reply, “Fine. I’ll go across the street to the Chevy dealership.” I head towards the door.
“Mister, wait!” the salesman shouts. “I’ll talk to my boss. I’ll see what we can do. He’s really going to wring my neck over this.”
An hour later I walk out of that Ford dealership, keys to my new Mustang in hand, and very proud of myself for negotiating such a great deal.
Except… I’ve been duped.
Although the salesman gave me a phenomenal sales price (ie, no illegal immigration), he gave me a pittance for my trade-in and a usurious financing rate (ie, a high rate of non-meritocratic, ideologically skewed green cards, refugees, “temporary” workers, etc).
The post “Deportations are a Bitter Pill” gives evidence that this Immigration Shell Game has been occurring for a long time. The post also outlines reasons why we should care about overall immigration policy rather than just illegal immigration.
Extra remarks to avoid misinterpretation or twisting of my words. I am speaking about averages and NOT individuals. I am NOT advocating a retroactive change to immigration policy. I am merely advocating a more measured pace of overall immigration going forward to better serve the interests of ALL Americans (citizen and legal immigrant).
Welcome to FR noob !
Might want to clarify, not sure where you are going with this, your analogy is weak at least I don’t get it. welcome noobie.
Didn’t these do-gooders watch ‘Mars Attacks’? Ackack!
Thanks for the welcome.
I took a lot of flak for some of my assertions in a different post “Deportations are a Bitter Pill”. In that post, I presented evidence that not only illegal immigration but also total immigration was very costly (on average). I argued that politicians have been distracting us with just illegal immigration (definitely important) while not talking about the costs and patterns in our legal immigration since the 60s. At least I wasn’t aware of the scale until I did the research. Since that post was long and dense, I promised I’d post an intuitive example for why we shouldn’t just focus on fixing illegal immigration.
Bottom line: I’ll get fleeced in a car negotiation if I just focus on selling price.
Oh...wait: wrong article. D’OH!
Thanks for the welcome.
The true analogy is the Salesman stole both your money and stole your trade in vehicle. Now get out of here or our illegal gang will pay a visit.
Illegal neighborhoods can have 4, yes 4 stolen vehicles for a homeowner. Wake up.
Mass migration is failure to support nationalism and allowing foreign controllers to steal your stuff. No country needs any immigration. Best to let a population set it’s own numbers. How well is Switzerland doing? Fine thanks.
Because of their inherent Humanity?
Oh. Wait.
From Are these claims about Switzerland’s Gun ownership true?
Full auto guns are illegal in Switzerland outside of the militia This is true, when citizens are in the militia they are issued full auto rifles, and when they leave the militia they can keep these weapons by converting them to semiautomatic weapons. It is illegal for civilians (including former-militia) to convert these back to full auto, or own other full auto weapons.
I see the truth in your analogy, too. I also think that the US immigration policy over the past 50 years has been non-democratically forced upon us. It seems like the overall policy causes mostly negatives for Americans as a whole and accrues benefits mainly to special groups.
Yet, we (meaning me and people like me who are still fooled) are placated or silenced with myths like “we’ve always been a nation of immigrants,” “immigration is our strength”, and “if you oppose, then you must be a racist”. My counters to these are: no, immigration prior to the 1960s was much different than it is today; no, not all immigration is automatically good; no, I have lots of valid concerns that even minority immigrants can identify with.
Note: Asterisks ** are used for emphasis since bold and italics don't seem to be available.
Yes they are, FYI: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3378678/posts
um....no.
Sorry about the asterisks. I’m new to social media but learning quickly. I know how to format now.
Thanks for engaging on this subject. At this moment I lack the time to give you a proper response. Later today I will.
Regards,
Slower legal immigration and deportation of illegals help to address my three primary concerns: erosion of national cohesion, subversion of our democracy, and exploding fiscal costs. For detailed substantiation, refer to the article, “Deportations are a Bitter Pill”, and the Heritage Foundation Report, “The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer”.
Believe it or not, the essay “Deportations are a Bitter Pill” is the concise version. Brevity has its merits but can also gloss over unspoken assumptions, making it harder for someone to follow the reasoning. I’ll explicitly state some of my unspoken assumptions now. Then, I’ll restate my primary concerns in broad strokes. You may not agree with my assumptions, but at least you’ll have an easier time following my logic.
We are but finite beings, with only limited capacity and resources, and cannot simultaneously get to know everyone personally. When faced with uncertainty and imperfect information, we further our survival with the ability to make generalizations. Generalizations, by definition, do not apply to every instance of the thing being generalized but nevertheless can yield statistically sound advice. Accurate generalizations only become stupid and/or immoral when exceptions are denied when evident, not sought when conditions allow, or not even expected.
A given incentive structure dominates human behavior within it. I shouldn’t need to convince anyone here that traditional American principles harness average human nature much more effectively than Communism/Socialism. The American way is a superior incentive structure to Communism. Immigration policy also creates an incentive structure.
Personal experience builds intuition and adds a dimension to understanding that numbers lack. Numbers bring insights and a broader perspective that personal experience lacks. If numbers contradict intuition, then intuition likely needs revision. However, we must be very careful with numbers; they can also powerfully deceive - sometimes inadvertently, but often deliberately. The devil is often in the details.
The principle of social proof (thoroughly documented in Cialdini’s “Influence: Science and Practice”) states that people tend to rely on others around them to determine how to act or think. The power of social proof grows with the number of people and the amount of uncertainty involved. It strongly influences how people vote – especially when people self-segregate into homogeneous communities and/or when people are bombarded by a one-sided media.
Humility is a virtue even for the best among us. Many people erroneously equate hard-to-understand, hard-to-believe, and/or boring with falsehood. When I was young, I was so certain in my beliefs and thought I had the world figured out. Subconsciously, the truth was less important than appearing smart or winning a debate. So many young adults are just like I was. Some older adults never grew out of it.
Let’s say I immigrate to Mexico, and I am the only American living there. In that case, I am overwhelmingly incentivized to fit in and identify with the Mexicans. I’ll learn Spanish, adopt local culture and perspectives, root for the Mexican team, marry a Mexican woman, emphasize how much I have in common with the natives, etc. Corrupt politicians would see no value in pandering to a single American. If I were to make a big deal about how different I am from all the other Mexicans, then I would be making it hard for them to like me, and I would likely not have a successful life.
In contrast, if I immigrate to Mexico with millions of other Americans, then my incentives are entirely different. It is more comfortable for me to self-segregate and surround myself with other Americans. Social proof leads me to think and act like other Americans around me. I can get by without learning Spanish and adopting the local culture. I can marry an American woman. If make a big deal of my American identity, then my fellow Americans can band together for political power and special treatment. Corrupt politicians can fan the flames to gain power. As Mexicans grow rightfully resentful at our antagonistic behavior, my fellow Americans and I are increasingly incentivized to import as many other Americans as possible to protect and grow our power.
Slow immigration incentivizes cooperation and integration. Fast immigration incentivizes antagonism, a zero-sum game, and eventual violence. Whether you are an immigrant or a native, which type of society would you prefer to live in?
I assert that the vast majority of our immigrants since the 60s vote Democrat. The biggest resistance I get to this assertion is that I can’t generalize about people. Someone might say generalizations about people are immoral and bigoted. He might also smugly add that these generalizations are stupid since they have no basis in fact. He says, “I know plenty of smart, hard-working, tax-paying immigrants! How dare you generalize about the people I know!” I retort, “So what? I also know plenty of smart, hard-working, tax-paying immigrants.“ The irony is that he is the one who is over-generalizing – he is over-generalizing his personal experience and mistaking his idealism for reality.
Since the mid 60s the bulk of our immigrants (legal & illegal) appear to have been poor, lucky to have a high school education, and nonwhite. I don’t care about someone’s color, but I do care how they vote. Are you aware that in every presidential election since 1964, the portion of nonwhites voting for the Democrat averaged 84% with a standard deviation of 4% (http://www.gallup.com/poll/139880/election-polls-presidential-vote-groups.aspx). In comparison, the portion of whites voting for the Democrat averaged 42% with a standard deviation of 7%.
We can speculate about many factors contributing to this difference. Is the average underprivileged voter more likely to support government redistribution of wealth? Is the average underprivileged voter more likely to be nonwhite since the average immigrant has been nonwhite and has come to this country already poor and without much education? Should we be surprised if an immigrant, lacking money, education and English fluency, does not immediately climb to the top of America’s social ladder? How much more seductive is identity politics when someone can point to statistics, showing rising income inequality between whites and nonwhites (which can be at least partially explained by immigration policy)? How powerful is social proof when people self-segregate into homogeneous communities and/or when people are bombarded by a one-sided media? When someone grows up in a socialist or overtly racist country, do they tend to carry unspoken ingrained assumptions that are hard to overcome? We can further research the factors, but the facts clearly show that a continuation of current immigration policy translates to greater Democratic power, more socialism, and an erosion of our Constitution. I would also add that I wouldn’t want the many affluent white Europeans, whom I personally know and like, to immigrate en masse because they would also pull our politics leftward.
Some liberals might be pleased how this immigration policy advances their agenda. I strongly caution them against short-sightedness. Subversion of democracy is good for no peace and freedom loving American. Wouldn’t you prefer to live in a color-blind, integrated, cohesive society? Wouldn’t you prefer to live in a society where people trust each other enough to resolve their political disagreement through open and civil persuasion and compromise? Or would you prefer to live in a sectarian society where people feel so cheated of their freedom and not confident in their democracy that they might resort to violence?
I contend that illegal immigration is currently costing us at least $100 billion a year. I also speculate that overall immigration is likely costing us many times that. My intent was merely to make a rough guess at the cost, corroborated by some simple idiot/reasonability checks and the detailed analysis by the Heritage Foundation, which seemed fairly trustworthy and based on overly conservative methodology and assumptions.
The biggest barrier to believing such a high cost is likely a common misconception about taxpayers. We tend to think, “I pay taxes and take no welfare. Therefore I must be contributing financially to our society.” However, we tend to forget that our government redistributes a significant amount of wealth through a variety of means other than direct welfare. Some examples are subsidies (via the tax code and otherwise) and public education. Even for Americans who benefit from redistribution, continued mass migration is fiscally bad for them as well; more net takers means less wealth can be redistributed to existing Americans.
Thanks for getting back to me and sharing all that information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.