Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Senate bill allows 46 million immigrants by 2033, says CBO

  1. #21
    The Light of Truth
    Northern Light's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,959

    Re: Senate bill allows 46 million immigrants by 2033, says CBO

    All those immigrants will be used to fill the lowest rung labor positions that no one else wants to do. The economic policies in our nation prevent the majority of professional immigrants from getting cheaply re-certified once they land. It's the same in other developed nations. Our government has an active interest in maintaining the privileged positions for its own people.

  2. #22
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,182

    Re: Senate bill allows 46 million immigrants by 2033, says CBO

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Good morning, CJ.

    Excellent post, with questions that are going to have to be answered sooner than anyone would like. Right now, the emphasis seems to be on getting as many immigrants as possible in order to swell the ranks of those that will probably vote Democrat. The "productive" wagon is being pulled by fewer and fewer people, though, as the number of immigrants is increasing percentage wise. What kind of jobs do the Democrats have in mind for these immigrants to be able to pay their share of taxes? I have heard nothing about that problem. We don't have sufficient jobs for people who want to work now...how are we going to provide jobs for millions of new immigrants?

    Short-sighted scenarios always bring problems, and this will be no different, IMO!
    Good afternoon Lady P.

    With respect to voting Democrat, there was a time in Canada when most immigrants voted Liberal here and many still do, but they've proven not to be so monolithic a block and many come with conservative philosophies and they don't like tax dollars being wasted nor do they like loose morals - in the short run, it may assist Democrats, but I'll be more hopeful in the long run.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  3. #23
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,182

    Re: Senate bill allows 46 million immigrants by 2033, says CBO

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The empirical evidence following the 1986 immigration reform revealed:

    1) A jump in immigrants' income
    2) Legalized immigrants pursued opportunities to enhance their skills/education, and that led to further increases in income
    3) Increases in income contributed to tax revenue growth



    The legislation contains mechanisms aimed at reducing the number of undocumented immigrants making it to the U.S. /able to work in the U.S. (tighter border security, e-verify, etc.). Absent the legislation, the barriers to undocumented immigration would be lower. Hence, assuming that border control and e-verify can reduce undocumented immigration, one should see fewer new undocumented immigrants following the adoption of the law than under current law.



    Even if the CBO's numbers are reasonably accurate, the net positive fiscal impact will be modest. CBO is not suggesting that adoption of the law would yield a large fiscal windfall. The undocumented immigrants account for a small share of the overall U.S. population, so the impact can't realistically be anything but modest.
    Fair points - I would counter as follows:

    First point - those general observations from 1986 referred to those illegals who were given amnesty and entered the mainstream - that may be revisited again with those who are currently here - that doesn't answer the question about the new 46 million and what skills they will bring with them. Here in Canada we provide faster access to those who have skills needed in our economy and/or those who bring with them $500,000 they are going to invest in Canada. I don't see there being 46 million wealthy and/or highly educated immigrants being the only ones finding their way to the US.

    Second point - the mechanisms you point out for reducing undocumented immigrants currently exist but, as in the case of e-verify, are not being used for political reasons. You also currently have a President who's ordered his Justice Department to not enforce the law in some cases making a mockery of those mechanisms. What's to say there won't be another lawless President who feels it's his/her perogative to flout American immigration law? If you don't secure the border sufficiently before you start granting amnesty, you'll have another flood of illegals seeking access to the land of opportunity and they will again be the least skilled and educated and a major drain on southern state's resources.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  4. #24
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Senate bill allows 46 million immigrants by 2033, says CBO

    Here's a novel idea; why doesn't the US government spend some money in areas that will produce instant effects? What I'm talking about is the underemployed areas of our economy. Places like plumbers, brick layers, pipe fitters, technical jobs, engineering, the list is actually quite large. Instead, no, states subsidize education for careers in psychology, philosophy, IT, where there are NO JOBS. If congress, and state legislatures want us to take them seriously that they are truly in it for the long haul, then why subsidize education for an education that gets someone nowhere fast, other than being in debt, and broke? Seriously, education, loan guarantees should reflect the reality of the marketplace, and it's not like no one knows how to add or subtract? We KNOW where the jobs are needed so why not offer real incentives to educate people to fill those positions?

    As far as the OP, well, I'm not particularly sold on CBO estimates, as I've never seen one EVER come even close to the projection, and the whole system, and its worth to legislators needs to be reevaluated, IMO.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  5. #25
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: Senate bill allows 46 million immigrants by 2033, says CBO

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Fair points - I would counter as follows:

    First point - those general observations from 1986 referred to those illegals who were given amnesty and entered the mainstream - that may be revisited again with those who are currently here - that doesn't answer the question about the new 46 million and what skills they will bring with them. Here in Canada we provide faster access to those who have skills needed in our economy and/or those who bring with them $500,000 they are going to invest in Canada. I don't see there being 46 million wealthy and/or highly educated immigrants being the only ones finding their way to the US.
    Elsewhere, I suggested that there are some structural factors that could produce a more muted response than had been the case in 1986. Among those factors is that the composition of the economy, particularly increasing knowledge-intensity, will create some barriers to significant near-term income expansion for the newly legalized immigrants. Some income increase will take place, but the headwinds affecting parts of the sectors that utilize a significant share of the undocumented immigrants could cap the income increase. CBO says that the population increase from the newly legalized immigrants would be 16 million not 46 million by 2033. That's not trivial, but IMO--others disagree--legalization may be the only practical means for addressing the status of those who are already in the U.S.

    When it comes to future immigration policy, I'd like to see greater emphasis on easy admission for immigrants who possess critical skills.

    Second point - the mechanisms you point out for reducing undocumented immigrants currently exist but, as in the case of e-verify, are not being used for political reasons. You also currently have a President who's ordered his Justice Department to not enforce the law in some cases making a mockery of those mechanisms. What's to say there won't be another lawless President who feels it's his/her perogative to flout American immigration law? If you don't secure the border sufficiently before you start granting amnesty, you'll have another flood of illegals seeking access to the land of opportunity and they will again be the least skilled and educated and a major drain on southern state's resources.
    While I favor legalization for the undocumented immigrants who are in the U.S., excluding those who have committed crimes (not including their undocumented status), I also favor enhanced border security and universal application of e-verify. Employers not utilizing e-verify should be given a reasonable time to implement it with failure to do so resulting in significant penalties. I also favor an expedited work permit process to address labor market demand for immigrant labor. IMO, that approach offers a good way to address the fate of the undocumented immigrants who are already in the U.S. and it can create a framework for substantially improving U.S. border control.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •