• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New DHS rules cancel deportations

Paul Krugman on illegal immigration:


Second, while immigration may have raised overall income slightly, many of the worst-off native-born Americans are hurt by immigration — especially immigration from Mexico. Because Mexican immigrants have much less education than the average U.S. worker, they increase the supply of less-skilled labor, driving down the wages of the worst-paid Americans. The most authoritative recent study of this effect, by George Borjas and Lawrence Katz of Harvard, estimates that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration.

That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants do "jobs that Americans will not do." The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants.

Finally, modern America is a welfare state, even if our social safety net has more holes in it than it should — and low-skill immigrants threaten to unravel that safety net.

Basic decency requires that we provide immigrants, once they're here, with essential health care, education for their children, and more. As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country's experience with immigration, "We wanted a labor force, but human beings came." Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the benefits they receive.

Worse yet, immigration penalizes governments that act humanely. Immigrants are a much more serious fiscal problem in California than in Texas, which treats the poor and unlucky harshly, regardless of where they were born.​


The question now becomes, "why do those who favor the interests of illegal immigrants hate low income African-Americans and other low income Americans so much that they're putting the interests of foreigner law breakers over the interests of their fellow citizens."
 
Etc. So now that you realize that your own study very strongly supports my position and completely rejects your own, you no longer find it credible eh? Interesting how those things change like that... Ok, well, do you have one you like better?

Do you have some type of reading comprehension problem?
 
Second, while immigration may have raised overall income slightly, many of the worst-off native-born Americans are hurt by immigration — especially immigration from Mexico. Because Mexican immigrants have much less education than the average U.S. worker, they increase the supply of less-skilled labor, driving down the wages of the worst-paid Americans. The most authoritative recent study of this effect, by George Borjas and Lawrence Katz of Harvard, estimates that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration. . . .


That may well be true. But the solution isn't just short term labor protectionism to try to artificially boost up the value of high school dropout labor, it should be to improve the capabilities of our workforce and create jobs that can take advantage of those capabilities.

That said, the worst paid Americans make minimum wage. Minimum wage is set by statute.
 
Paul Krugman on illegal immigration:


Second, while immigration may have raised overall income slightly, many of the worst-off native-born Americans are hurt by immigration — especially immigration from Mexico. Because Mexican immigrants have much less education than the average U.S. worker, they increase the supply of less-skilled labor, driving down the wages of the worst-paid Americans. The most authoritative recent study of this effect, by George Borjas and Lawrence Katz of Harvard, estimates that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration.

That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants do "jobs that Americans will not do." The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants.

Finally, modern America is a welfare state, even if our social safety net has more holes in it than it should — and low-skill immigrants threaten to unravel that safety net.

Basic decency requires that we provide immigrants, once they're here, with essential health care, education for their children, and more. As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country's experience with immigration, "We wanted a labor force, but human beings came." Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the benefits they receive.

Worse yet, immigration penalizes governments that act humanely. Immigrants are a much more serious fiscal problem in California than in Texas, which treats the poor and unlucky harshly, regardless of where they were born.​


The question now becomes, "why do those who favor the interests of illegal immigrants hate low income African-Americans and other low income Americans so much that they're putting the interests of foreigner law breakers over the interests of their fellow citizens."

Perhaps you should have posted a link to the full piece so that people could have read this paragraph:

"We shouldn't exaggerate these problems. Mexican immigration, says the Borjas-Katz study, has played only a ''modest role'' in growing U.S. inequality. And the political threat that low-skill immigration poses to the welfare state is more serious than the fiscal threat: the disastrous Medicare drug bill alone does far more to undermine the finances of our social insurance system than the whole burden of dealing with illegal immigrants."

North of the Border - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com

I think that liberals, for the most part, do not favor the interests of illegal immigrants. Rather, they favor reforming immigration policies to provide a rational level of immigration.
 
Perhaps you should have posted a link to the full piece

Huh? I DID post a link to the full opinion piece.

so that people could have read this paragraph:


"We shouldn't exaggerate these problems. Mexican immigration, says the Borjas-Katz study, has played only a ''modest role'' in growing U.S. inequality. And the political threat that low-skill immigration poses to the welfare state is more serious than the fiscal threat: the disastrous Medicare drug bill alone does far more to undermine the finances of our social insurance system than the whole burden of dealing with illegal immigrants."​

Krugman shifts gears and talks about the role that immigrants are having on growing inequality. That's not the subject under discussion, so it's irrelevant to the topic. The second part of the paragraph involves Krugman slamming the Bush Administration for their Medicare polices. I realize that that section gave you a woody, but, you know, Bush has been out of office for 3 years, so the issue of liberals reminiscing about getting wood when reading Bush Administration criticisms also doesn't have much to do with the topic.
 
Last edited:
Huh? I DID post a link to the full opinion piece.



Krugman shifts gears and talks about the role that immigrants are having on growing inequality. That's not the subject under discussion, so it's irrelevant to the topic. The second part of the paragraph involves Krugman slamming the Bush Administration for their Medicare polices. I realize that that section gave you a woody, but, you know, Bush has been out of office for 3 years, so the issue of liberals reminiscing about getting wood when reading Bush Administration criticisms also doesn't have much to do with the topic.

The import of the part you didn't quote is that, while it's a bit of a problem for low-wage Americans, it's really not that big of a problem. Of course the op-ed was also written in '06 when there were far more illegals in the country.
 
The import of the part you didn't quote is that, while it's a bit of a problem for low-wage Americans, it's really not that big of a problem. Of course the op-ed was also written in '06 when there were far more illegals in the country.

I think RiverDads posts have set a new record for flip-flopping; twice in about 5 or 6 posts. :lamo

All we need to make this official is for RiverDad to declare Krugman a liberal Obama-lover who can't be believed
 
Back
Top Bottom