Posted on 04/01/2006 11:49:29 PM PST by Plutarch
In coming weeks, Republicans in Congress must choose either a comprehensive immigration reform package including a guest-worker program or a narrowly focused border-security bill. The former would improve homeland security, help our economy and build greater Republican majorities. The latter, conversely, would ignore fundamental problems, hurt our economy and risk the party's majority status.
Lawbreakers should not be rewarded with citizenship, but respect for the rule of law need not conflict with two other pillars of conservative philosophy: freedom and economic growth...
--------snip-------------
Much of the resentment toward immigrant labor is based on the misperception that it is a drain on our economy and resources. However, researchers at the Academy of Sciences for the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform have demonstrated that immigrants add about $10 billion annually in net economic output due to the increased supply of labor and resulting lower prices. Furthermore, a typical newcomer pays $80,000 more in taxes than he takes out in benefits over the course of a lifetime.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
I think you're wrong also:
That chart shows a positive $80K input for immigrants "overall", but for immigrants having less than a high-school education - i.e., the typical wetback - the figure is a net drain, -$13K.
But this is a good find: the WSJ is lying by omission in lumping in such immigrants as college-educated Europeans, Indians, and Pakistanis, along witht he hundreds of thousands of illegals from just to the south of us.
No, it is a net drain of $89,000. The -$13,000 figure is a sum of the -$89,000 of the original immigrant, and the supposed $76,000 positive contribution of his descendants (an estimate based on the historical performance of pre-1965, mainly European, immigrants, BTW).
Gillespie specifically states that the positive $80,000 figure is of the immigrant himself, not including his descendents.
ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL!
Although... I'm a moderate on the immigration issue, oppposed to the felonizing approach of the House bill which I consider extreme, damaging to conservatism and the Republican party in the long run, and bad policy.
Although... I'm more in line with the WSJ position.
Both (all) sides on the issue need fact checking, and on both (all) sides it's far, far, far too rare. So, good work.
Bump! The WSJ is at war with Main Street. Must be something in the water in New York City...
Dunno. I'd trade illegals for trial lawyers... whatever their issues illegals are far less destructive than trial lawyers.
Tell Mexico we'll give green cards to 10 illegals for every American trial lawyers they'll take off our hands...
Edmund Gillespie, Vin Weber, Charles Black, Grover Norquist and of course Jack Abrammof...
It goes without saying, that money corrupts. And lots and lots of money is flowing to these folks...and their interests are no longer conservative. They have been bought and sold.
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.