Posted on 07/11/2005 7:19:00 PM PDT by bayourod
----SNIP----
Q: How is the undocumented immigrant community affecting the U.S. economy? A: First and foremost, it's a source of value added. The total goods and services that they consume through their paycheck, plus all that they produce for their employers, is close to about $800 billion.
They're also producing at relatively lower costs because the undocumented population typically gets about 20% less in wages than if they were legalized. That leads to lower prices for us and higher profits to employers.
In addition, they're obviously a huge consumer base. We've seen that 90% of the wages that the undocumented population gets are spent inside the U.S. Remittances are sent abroad, but that only represents about 10% of immigrants' income. The numbers are becoming quite huge. We estimate about $50 billion dollars in remittances this year. That means that total consumptive capacity remaining in the U.S. is $400 billion to $450 billion.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
You may be right. I certainly am not prepared to contradict you. Except I do know that we are facing serious labor shortages in some sectors.
Let us clarify and reason together, Bayourod.
So I am right that improved business profits is the sole, exclusive reason for business (and thus Republican) toleration/support of illegal entry into the U.S., but I am wrong that it is the cheapness of the labor that so motivates. Instead it is the unavailability of non-illegal labor that causes enterprises to relunctantly condone illegal entry. Is that what you are saying?
"But if my city decides that the illegals are not a problem and that the businesses are crucial to our economy then we should be allowed to ignore them."
I guess you are in support of breaking the law. I thought if you didn't like a law you were supposed to change it. Why bother changing laws you view as unjust; if enough people break it, then the law is invalid. Is this what you condone? Isn't this anarchy?
There is nothing conservative about being anti-business.
Employers advertise job openings and no one applies.
I have known of construction contractors who have lost contracts because they could not get employees, while at the same time I've seen guys sit in ice houses all day drinking beer and complaining about the Mexicans taking all the jobs.
Anyone who claims that he can't get or keep a job now days only needs to look in a mirror to see the cause.
No, but law enforcement resources are finite, not unlimited. We could spend 100% of the city police budget on catching speeders alone. Or we could spend 100% on busting marijuana users. Priority decisions have to be made.
Considering how busy you are today on these immigration threads, you don't seem to find the time to answer my question. What exactly do you mean by "employees that look illegal"? How exactly does a person "look illegal"?
I didn’t say there wasn’t a shortage, Bayman. If there is, it is a non sequitur to state that illegal entry is a positive good overall.
I would first like to clarify whether the following point, if you would be so kind.
So I am right that improved business profits is the sole, exclusive reason for business (and thus Republican) toleration/support of illegal entry into the U.S.
My comment deals with your view of the law not the finite resources of law enforcement. As to the resources of law enforcement, you could make the same argument in favor of not enforcing any law you don't personally like. IMHO you are promoting disrespect and basically supporting criminal violation of the laws as established by the citizens of the US. This is anarchy.
To hell with ideology, rod.
How about spoken by a sincerely concerned American citizen?
A citizen who's watching -- good intentioned? -- people -- like yourself? -- promoting idea(s) for solving *one* problem only to risk [many] more problemS than their solution(s) ever could cure be spawned.
OK, neighbor?
"There is nothing conservative or patriotic about the Antis."
Did I imply there was, rod?
In any event there is nothing UNconservative or UNpatriotic about the Antis, either.
"They are just big government, anti-business socialists."
Isn't that the definition of "fascist", rod?
Are you a fascist, 'cuz I sure ain't a socialist.
It's cheap of you to attempt smearing another poster in such a way, don'tcha think?
Hate to say it; buttttt, makes me wonder what you're really up to if you're going to employ tawdry tactics like that, rod.
FBD says: "...and if you think Mexico is playing on a level playing field with the U.S. then I suggest you go try and buy a piece of property in Mexico. You will be in for a rude surprise, Gringo."
HA!!
Right you are 'bout that, bucko.
But ya can add Japan, China & just about every other developed nation in the world to your list, too.
*Except* The United States.
What's wrong with *that* picture, eh?
Seems like we here in the good ol' USA are the only ones swallowing this "Global" bullshit, and that's being proved in a number of ways almost every day. Newly *discovered* "racism" by the Japanese in Japan -- by Caucasian UN pinheads, no less -- notwithstanding. ;^)
bayourod said: "I have known of construction contractors who have lost contracts because they could not get employees, while at the same time I've seen guys sit in ice houses all day drinking beer and complaining about the Mexicans taking all the jobs."
Admittedly FBD there's a kernel of truth in that statement.
Have seen it for myself & I've told you so in the past, too.
Still, throwing our borders open to any & all comers [read: "immigrants" - legal or otherwise] for the sake of "business" ain't the answer, either.
...& therein lies the rub with me.
Really Rod? As your posted article reveals:"the undocumented population typically gets about 20% less in wages than if they were legalized."
How is it then that these illegals, whom the employer supposedly didn't intentionaly hire: How is it that they are getting wages that are recieving:
"20% less in wages than if they were legalized"
(crickets chirping)
" Also Rod: Who makes up for the 20% lower wages?
Could it possibly be the U.S. taxpayer?
BTW, you are aware that illegal immigrants cost more in taxes then they contribute, aren't you?
Of course you are...and that is an indirect govt. subsidy for a businesses who hire illegals.
Instead of unplugging the drains themselves, the manager would call Julie; and this millionaire babe would go over there, and personally unplug those drains for these guys, who supposedly are the hardest working people on the planet, and will do any work better and cheaper.
Again, that is a myth, and is pure unadulterated B.S.
After all; what country was it, that created the "afternoon siesta"? Yeah.
Don't buy that line that the U.S. worker is lazy, and that illegal immigrant workers are just "doing the jobs that Americans won't do": that is globalist propaganda B.S., spread by swamp dwelling globalist promoters like Bayou-Rod.
The Antis would love Cuba and North Korea. No Walmarts over there.
Assuming you're not referring to George Bush or Alberto Gonzalez, I guess you mean all those guys on the truck. So is it the color of their skin that makes them "look illegal," or the fact that a bunch of them are riding in the back of a truck? Hmmm, doesn't sound too much like racial profiling to me....!
Thanks, rod, you're always good for a few chuckles!
Not when you consider their $800 Billion contribution to our economy. The businesses they work for pay taxes that wouldn't be paid if they had to close or relocate over seas because of lack of employees.
The legal employees of those companies (accountants, salesmen, engineers, etc...) also pay taxes that wouldn't be paid without the companies being able to stay in business. Do you pay your share of the federal budget? It's over twenty thousand dollars per year for every man woman and child. Very few pay the amount the government spends for their benefit. The vast majority of federal taxes are paid by the wealthy. Even on the local level, most school taxes are paid by people and businesses without children in school.
To hold illegals to a different standard is intellectually dishonest.
How about just siezing and auctioning off the businesses of those convicted of criminal trafficking in illegal labor. How about that?
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.