Replies

I'll look over these in more detail tomorrow as it is getting late but at first glance fairus.org link seems pretty well researched and appears to provide reasonable estimates.

"My second education cost estimate, where I used 1/10 of the original estimate"

The fairus data uses 141,000 as their number so lets go with that for the sake of comparing the cost benefit ratio for a second.

They claim that $167.4 million is spent on undocumented children and $234.4 million on their U.S. Citizen siblings.

Using your previous $7557 per child estimate, that would mean there are 53 thousand total children, 22 thousand undocumented and 31 thousand who are U.S. citizens by birth.

Assuming they mean for that 22 thousand undocumented children to be counted as part of the 141,000 total illegals, then the adult to child ratio is something like 6/1. Higher then I would have guessed but reasonable enough that I have no reason to doubt it.

"it is silly to discount the cost of children born to illegal immigrants while here illegally"

I utterly and totally disagree. Citizenship is almost sacred to me and I will never accept the view that another citizen is anything but fully deserving of all the rights and privileges of citizenship based on the circumstances of their birth.

OK, so a quicky ballpark is that there is a gross gain of roughly 140 million dollars broken down in post 151. Offset by losses of (according to your link)

$7,629,422 incarceration of criminals (I'm using the highest total listed dues to reporting problems, see link for explanation)
$2,055,490 medical costs (again I'm using the highest number available since they do not otherwise specify)
$167,400,000 million education costs for undocumented children

For a total cost of about 177 million dollars with a net loss of 37 million dollars.

A net loss of 37 million dollars translates into a net loss of $262 dollars per illegal alien. Just to be clear, that is $262 dollars, not thousands dollars.

Now I'm sure this is not totally comprehensive as we have not tried to calculate for example the wear and tear on the roads (negative) nor have we tried to add in the increase in domestic sales (positive) but I think we are getting pretty close. $262 dollars per illegal alien

A net loss of 37 million dollars translates into a net loss of $262 dollars per illegal alien. Just to be clear, that is $262 dollars, not thousands dollars.

If I were to accept these low estimates, which I don't completely, you would still have to explain to me why we are in any way obligated to allow people to come in and steal $262 per person. Even if it were only a net loss of $1, explain to me why we wouldn't be fully motivated to stop the theft. The main argument of the pro-illegal crowd is that illegals are an economic benefit and so are worth all of the trouble they cause. If the net loss were even $1 per person, that fact completely removes that argument. If we accept your numbers, then illegals are still breaking into our house and stealing $262 per person per year. Would you allow someone to come into your house and steal even that amount?

Let's not forget all of the costs of illegals that I have been unable to find stats for. For instance, in the case of uninsured illegal drivers, every time one gets in an accident, all of our insurance premiums go up. The insurance companies simply pass the added cost to the paying customers. Since insurance is mandatory in most states, that means all of us. It is a hidden tax to pay for illegals. There are many other examples of costs that I outlined earlier, so the $262 figure is low, considering it only includes the three areas we listed - education, incarceration, and direct medical costs.

Also another reminder: we have kept the discussion limited to Oregon, since that is the area of interest listed in the article, but Oregon has a very low number of illegals compared to the border states. The number of illegals in California, for instance, is anywhere from 2-3 million, depending on who you ask. I am not able to research stats for California right now, but I am willing to bet that the increase in associated costs is not a one-to-one increase, but probably more of an exponential increase, in much the same way that criem rates tend to increase exponentially as a function of population density.

The end result is that Oregon's costs for illegals are probably trivial compared to states with higher illegal population densities, and we have determined that the net loss per illegal is, at least, $262. It only gets worse from there.

As for the anchor babies, you are dead set on discounting any costs they may incur, but what you fail to realize is that, even if we accept that the baby is entitled to all priveleges of citizenship, the baby's family who are illegal benefit just as much from that citizenship as the baby. If some sort of welfare/food stamp/other social security benefit is issued on behalf of the baby, it is not the baby who chooses how it is spent. If a family of 6 illegals and 1 anchor baby moves into a public housing unit because of the entitlement that the anchor baby creates, then that would still be a 4 bedroom or so unit rented to 6 illegals, with all the associated costs of maintenance, administration, and loss rent due to below-market charges, that the 6 illegals benefit from as well as the anchor baby. So, 1 anchor baby in a family entitles the whole family to assistance, albeit at a reduced rate. To discount that cost is to be dishonest.