January 15, 2018
It's time to sort the good from the bad in the 800,000-person DACA bloc
A study shows that DACA-aged illegals are more likely to commit additional crimes and be jailed than citizens. With all the news about the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program being subject to a deal, this latest bit of news points to a need to start separating good from bad DACA recipients in any amnesty deal for them.
According to the Washington Examiner:
A new report about crimes committed by illegals finds that younger undocumented immigrants [sic; should be "illegal aliens" –ed.] who were eligible for former President Obama's DACA amnesty program commit far more crimes than other immigrants or U.S. citizens.In unearthing rare data that details the crimes and sentences of illegals in Arizona, the Crime Prevention Research Center reported that immigrants age 15-35, the general population of the 700,000 in Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, "commit crime at twice the rate of young U.S. citizens."
The crimes cited in the study are authentic thug-type crimes, such as murder, rape, robbery, and kidnapping, not the white-collar variety such as Social Security identification theft, which is an even greater subset of violators.
Two caveats should be noted from the report: the study covers only Arizona state, and its conclusions are a nationwide projection from those results. Also, the study itself covers only DACA-aged youths, not actual verified DACA recipients.
That said, the research was done by the respected John Lott, whose work is known for its rigor. Meanwhile, any youth of the right age who hasn't applied for DACA would be a fool not to, given its 99% approval rate on applications. There is reason to think there is merit in Lott's claims.
This points to a problem we see again and again in DACA recipients: for every valedictorian proudly featured in the press among the program's 800,000-strong number, we have far higher numbers of illiterates, underachievers, unassimilated non-English-speakers, dropouts, and repeat criminals.
The negotiations in the Congress on a DACA deal with President Trump continuously use the 800,000-strong recipient base as an undifferentiated bloc. Yet we know there was no differentiation in the approval process, and the valedictorians went into the same bin as the underachievers and the underclass-assimilators. Most Americans would be fine with allowing the valedictorians and the 900 servicemembers among the 800,000-person bloc as part of a deal, as these people would probably make successful Americans. Where they draw the line is with gang members, habitual criminals, underachievers, and terrorist sympathizers.
Why anyone would refrain from splitting up the DACA bloc into categories that go well beyond an applicant's age is a mystery to me. Breaking up the bloc will make a deal for the more deserving of the applicants that much easier if a deal ever comes to pass.
DACA:
THE IMMIGRATION TROJAN HORSE
How the original DREAM act was designed to
cover 90% of the illegal alien population in the US.
Ann Coulter: ‘Let’s Start by Deporting the DREAMers!’
“Let’s start by
deporting the DREAMers,” quipped Ann Coulter in a Monday-aired interview on
SiriusXM’s Breitbart
News Dailywith Breitbart
News’s Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow.
NETHER PARTY PLANS TO PASS IMMIGRATION REFORM BECAUSE CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT WORKS JUST AS WELL.
40 MILLION MEXICANS DID NOT JUMP OUR BORDERS, JOBS, WELFARE LINES AND VOTING BOOTHS BY ACCIDENT. IT WAS BY INVITATION!
Idaho Is Fastest-Growing State
in U.S.
Idaho has the fastest-growing population in
the United States, according to newly released data from the U.S. Census
Bureau.
Study: Immigrant Population in U.S.
Booms to 44M, Majority from Mexico
WASHINGTON, D.C. — There is now a record
level of immigrants living in the United States – standing at roughly 44
million people nationwide – who entered the U.S. both illegally and
legally from a foreign country.
CBO Says Senate DREAM Act Would Cost Taxpayers Billions
Friday afternoon bomb
By Jason Richwine
CIS Immigration Blog, December 18, 2017
For most Americans, a Friday afternoon in mid-December is a time when work is winding down and holiday plans begin to take center stage. It also seems to be a time, coincidentally or not, for the government to publish reports that run counter to prevailing media narratives. Keeping with tradition, the CBO reported on Friday that the DREAM Act, which would provide amnesty to up to three million illegal immigrants who arrived before the age of 18, would generate a net cost of $26 billion over the next 10 years. Because advocates claim that virtually any loosening of immigration restrictions will benefit taxpayers — even refugees, despite their low earnings and high welfare consumption, are said to be fiscal boons — and because the media have been eager to run with that narrative, the CBO's estimate may come as a surprise.
In truth, however, it's hard to see how the analysis could have come out the other way. Young illegal immigrants — some of whom already have work permits, due to the Obama Administration's DACA program — currently pay most taxes, but cannot receive most federal benefits. Legalization is therefore bound to be costly. Furthermore, as a generally lower-skill population, DREAM Act beneficiaries will use more government services than average. The CBO estimates that the DREAM Act would generate about $1 billion of extra tax revenue from ending "off-the-books" labor, but that gain is swamped by $27 billion in new spending on benefits. The most expensive benefit enjoyed by Dream Act recipients would be Obamacare subsidies ($12 billion), followed by the earned income and child tax credits ($5.5 billion), Medicaid ($5 billion), and food stamps ($2 billion).
‘Dream Act’ Is Taxpayers’ Nightmare
By Bob Dane
By Ira Mehlman
By Theresa Cardinal Brown
By Jeanne Batalova and Michael Fix
Migration Policy Institute, December 2017
The sectoral distribution of employed DACA recipients differs in significant ways from the millennial workforce in general, and White, Black, Asian, and U.S.-born Hispanic workers, in particular. These differentiated employment patterns likely reduce direct competition.
For example, DACA recipients were more likely than millennials overall to work in hospitality (23 percent versus 16 percent) and construction (11 percent versus 6 percent). Shares of Blacks, Asians, U.S.-born Hispanics, and Whites were all lower than the share of DACA workers in these industries (see Figure 2).
DACA participants were less likely than all other millennials, regardless of their race/ethnicity, to work in education, health, and social services. At the same time, Black and U.S.-born Hispanic millennials were more likely to work in retail trade than DACA recipients (19 percent versus 14 percent). In this case, we focus on DACA recipients rather than on DREAM-eligible young adults because the former already have work permits. DACA recipients represent the core of the DREAM-eligible millennial population, and their industries of employment provide a reasonable prediction of future sectoral distribution of other DREAMers.
How many Democrats will do what’s right and refuse to pass a budget unless Congress authorizes a clean Dream Act?
Watch: DACA Illegal Aliens Turn
on Democrat Tim Kaine After Failing to Shut Down Govt over Amnesty
Open borders activists are turning on
Democrats for not voting to shut down the federal government to give amnesty to
nearly 800,000 illegal aliens shielded from deportation by the President
Obama-created Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
Are all DREAMers Students and Soldiers?
DACA:
THE IMMIGRATION TROJAN HORSE
How the original DREAM act was designed to
cover 90% of the illegal alien population in the US.
January 12, 2018
Today
DACA (Deferred Action-Childhood Arrivals) is a major issue for
the Trump administration, with politicians from both parties attempting to
persuade President Trump to provide lawful status for the illegal aliens who
had been granted temporary lawful status in an ill-conceived and, indeed,
illegal program that had been implemented by President Obama, a politically
adept manipulator of language and a master of deception.
On December 18th I participated
in an interview on Fox News to discuss DACA and the fact
that according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) legalizing the
estimated population of “Dreamers” would cost an estimated $26 billion.
On January 9th President
Trump conducted a bi-partisan White House meeting to consider a
compromise that would provide lawful immigration status for the approximately
800,000 illegal aliens who enrolled in DACA. As the San Francisco
Chronicle reported, Trump seeks a "bill of
love" from Congress for "Dreamers"
The “deal” would require
funding a border wall, ending “chain migration” and perhaps, making E-Verify
mandatory. Of course without an adequate number of ICE agents, mandatory
E-Verify would be of limited value since unscrupulous employers could simply
hire illegal aliens “off the books” and without agents to conduct field
investigations these criminally deceptive employment practices would not be
discovered.
President Trump’s
previous call for hiring an additional 10,000 ICE agents was not mentioned by
the participants in the meeting. This is extremely worrisome.
A lack of effective
interior enforcement of our immigration laws, has for decades, undermined the
integrity of the immigration system. In fact the 9/11 Commission cited the
lack of interior enforcement as a key vulnerability that terrorists, and not
only the 9/11 hijackers, had exploited to embed themselves in the U.S. in
preparation to carrying out deadly attacks.
DACA was a travesty
foisted on America and Americans by the Obama administration, from its
inception, was a scam based on lies and false suppositions. Legalizing these
800,000 illegal aliens would, in point of fact, legitimize Obama’s illegal
action.
Obama claimed that he was
invoking “prosecutorial discretion” when he stood in the White House Rose
Garden on June 15, 2012 and announced that “since Congress failed to act” (to
pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform) he was going to act by creating DACA.
But in reality Congress did act: it voted down legislation known
as Comprehension Immigration Reform and, in so doing, took an action that is
consistent with the role of Congress as established by the U.S. Constitution
that created the system of “checks and balances.”
For Mr. Obama, however,
the problem was that Congress did not act the way he wanted
it to act.
Two days after that
speech in 2012, I wrote an Op-Ed, “Obama Invokes Prosecutorial Discretion to
Circumvent Constitution and Congress,” in which I noted that what Obama had
referred to as “Prosecutorial Discretion” should, in reality, be referred to as
“Prosecutorial Deception.”
Legitimate use of
prosecutorial discretion can provide a pragmatic solution to real-world limitations
of law enforcement resources in a manner comparable to a triage. For
example, law enforcement officers frequently ignore relatively minor violations
of law so that those limited resources can be available to address more serious
violations of law. Consider, for example, the police officer operating
speed radar who ignores cars that exceed the speed limit by a small margin, but
are being otherwise driven in a safe manner. This enables the police
officer to focus on vehicles that are being driven dangerously.
Under DACA, however,
illegal aliens were not ignored to conserve limited resources. In fact,
limited resources were not conserved but were squandered to provide temporary
lawful status to a huge number of illegal aliens without legal authority or
justification.
Moreover, DACA
constituted the de facto creation of law without the legislative process, but
by unconstitutional executive fiat.
Let’s now consider the
notion of “deferred action,” the foundation upon which DACA was purportedly created.
There are legitimate provisions in the immigration system to provide aliens
with “deferred action” when it is a matter of compassion, for humanitarian
purposes. The key word is “deferred.” What is deferred is the
ultimate required departure of non-immigrant aliens.
For example, if a family
from another country lawfully came to the United States as non-immigrants for a
temporary visit with friends or relatives in the United States and one of the
members of the family was injured in an accident or became ill, those aliens
could apply for deferred action so that they would not have to leave the United
States until the family crisis was resolved.
As an INS agent I dealt
with such cases. Generally the doctor who was treating the injured or ill
family member would provide documentation to immigration authorities to verify
the medical situation, with periodic updates.
As an INS special agent I
was responsible for conducting investigations to make certain that
applications were not fraudulent.
Generally these aliens
would not be granted employment authorization except under the most
extraordinary of circumstances if they needed to remain in the United States
for a protracted period of time. However, DACA essentially “dropped a net” over
800,000 illegal aliens, not out of humanitarian concerns because of an
unforeseen emergency but as a means of achieving a political objective.
Obama claimed that his
action was to help young people who were brought to the United States by their
parents and, consequently, were the victims of their parents’ actions over
which they had no control.
Obama was counting on the
fact that Americans are among the most compassionate people in the world,
especially where children are concerned. Media reports furthered this narrative
and, to this day, many ill-informed Americans believe that all aliens who
participated in DACA were teenagers. But in fact, the age cutoff was
actually 31. These aliens simply needed to claim that
they had been brought to the United States prior to their 16th birthdays.
Those aliens today might now be as old as 36 years of age. DACA should
have been called DACCA
(Deferred Action- Claimed Childhood Arrivals).
There were virtually no
interviews or field investigations to verify any information or claims
contained in the applications.
(The DREAM Act would have
allowed aliens as old as 35 years of age to apply to participate in the amnesty
that would have been created had the legislation passed.)
It is vital to note that
even the term DREAM Act and the derivative term “Dreamers” is
hypocritical. Ever since the administration of Jimmy Carter, the term
“Alien” has been eradicated from the immigration debate, not out of supposed
“political correctness” but as a means of Orwellian thought control and
Newspeak.
However, the “DREAM Act”
is an acronym for Development, Relief, and Education
for Alien Minors Act. It is
maddening that when the imagery of the “American Dream” can be exploited, the
term “alien” becomes palatable -- but only when used in conjunction with
this bit of Orwellian deception.
If the purpose of the
DREAM Act was to help young illegal aliens, why did the politicians and “Gang of Eight” not simply limit it to aliens who had
not yet attained the age of 21 and who could provide immigration authorities
with their current school transcripts and report cards to verify their status
as students in good standing?
What was never discussed
in the mainstream media is that the whole point to the DREAM Act, pushed by
some members of Congress and particularly the “Gang of Eight,” was to construct a legislated
immigration “Trojan Horse.”
The DREAM Act established
35 years of age as the cutoff age for this amnesty because it would have
covered an estimated 90% of the illegal alien population in the United
States. Furthermore, without the ability to conduct interviews, let alone
field investigations, aliens could easily lie about their identities, their
dates of birth and even their dates of entry into the United States.
There would be no way for
adjuration officers to refute the claims of the aliens who participated in
the program.
The DREAM Act was a
carefully disguised version of failed legislation known as Comprehensive
Immigration Reform.
In 2007, after I
testified about Comprehensive Immigration Reform before several hearings in the
House and Senate, I wrote an Op-Ed for the Washington Times, Immigration bill a ‘No Go' in which I suggested
that the legislative disaster be renamed the “Terrorist Assistance and
Facilitation Act” because under that legislation, millions of illegal aliens
who had entered the United States surreptitiously and without inspection, would
have been provided with lawful status and official identity documents.
This would have violated
the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided
testimony.
I was gratified when
then-Senator Jeff Sessions quoted my Op-Ed from the floor of the U.S. Senate
during the contentious floor debate on Comprehensive Immigration Reform on
three separate days, in which he shared my concerns and my proposed new name
for that legislation.
The Immigration Reform
and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) created a massive amnesty program that
ultimately led to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our
nation. It has been said that insanity is doing the same things the same
way and expecting a different outcome.
As a highly successful
real estate magnate, President Trump must especially understand that just as it
is unwise to erect a building on a swamp, legislation must be constructed on
morally and legally solid ground.
Politicians supporting widespread amnesty for
illegal aliens, said Coulter, were motivated by either “corruption or
stupidity” in their pursuit to “destroy our country.”
Criminal illegals, tax cheats, sanctuary cities OK'd in Gang of Six immigration deal
WASHINGTON SECRETS
Criminal illegals, tax cheats, sanctuary cities OK'd in Gang of Six immigration deal
by Paul bEdard | From left, President Donald Trump, accompanied by Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., Vice President Mike Pence, Senate Majority Whip Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas., and Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., speaks during a meeting on immigration in the Roosevelt Room at the White House, Thursday, Jan. 4, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
Ann Coulter: ‘Let’s Start by Deporting the DREAMers!’
Getty Images/Chip Somodevilla
“Let’s start by
deporting the DREAMers,” quipped Ann Coulter in a Monday-aired interview on
SiriusXM’s Breitbart
News Dailywith Breitbart
News’s Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow.
The status quo of demographic
change wrought by immigration — both lawful and unlawful — must change in order
to “save the country,” said Coulter.
Describing DREAMers — those
targeted by the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
(DACA) policy and subsequently proposed bills seeking to codify it as
federal law — as “the most annoying people in the universe,” Coulter jestingly
recommended prioritizing the most obnoxious cohort of illegal immigrants for
deportation:
It has to be said that many of
the legal and illegal low-wage workers, they’re incredibly hard workers,
they’re really nice people, and it occurred to me … that I actually like all of
the illegal immigrants except the DREAMers. They’re the ones I want deported
first because they’re the activists. They’re the obnoxious ones. They’re
the ones who go to congressional offices and stamp their feet and say, “How
dare you not rush to grant us amnesty?” Whereas the other illegals don’t have
the time to be protesting; they’re busy working, being polite, being so
friendly and nice and saying, “Merry Christmas.”
No. Let’s start by deporting
the DREAMers. That’s point one.
Without border security to halt
the flow of foreigners illegally immigrating to America and deportations of
swathes of foreigners illegally in the homeland, it is “lights out for
America,” added Coulter.
“Unless [DREAMers] are not
deported, they’re all becoming citizens,” warned Coulter.
“Widespread, unchecked,
unfettered immigration,” said Marlow, is an existential threat to the
continuity of American values.
Previous efforts to amnesty
illegal immigrants — such as the Gang of Eight bill supported by Sen. Marco
Rubio (R-FL) — amounted to “kill America” endeavors, said Coulter. Such amnesty
proposals are regularly marketed by their proponents under the guise of
“comprehensive immigration reform.”
Any legislated amnesty will
necessarily extend beyond limiting parameters promised by its supporters, said
Coulter, pointing to the broadening of previous amnesties beyond originally
stated limits via judicial rulings.
Birthright citizenship must
also end, agreed both Coulter and Marlow. Automatic extension of citizenship to
“anchor babies,” said Coulter, is “crazy” and “insane.” Existing policy is
exploited by a “birth tourism,” in which pregnant foreigners
time visits to the U.S. to coincide with their expected due dates.
Demographic change is an
existential issue trumping all other challenges, said both Coulter and Marlow.
“All of it is moot if we don’t
and end the DACA amnesty talk and if we don’t get the wall up,” said Marlow.
“If that doesn’t happen, by the time we get to the polls next November,
literally, the country will be on a precipice.”
The absence of a southern
border wall will render recent political achievements — such as lessening
burdensome federal regulations and taxes, the appointment of quality jurists to
the judiciary, killing ISIS terrorists, and deciding to move the U.S. embassy
in Israel to Jerusalem, and undermining popular trust in left-wing news media
outlets — naught, said Marlow:
All these wonderful
achievements by this president, it’s not going to make a dime’s worth of
difference, because not only are we setting our society on a path where we’re
just legalizing undocumented Democrats, but we’re not gonna win any elections
because we don’t keep our biggest promises. I really do think this is a
do-or-die thing, and we’re a year in, and so far, it’s die.
“All of these victories are
going to be Pyrrhic victories if we live in a country where no Republican can
be elected president ever again,” concurred Coulter, framing to political and
partisan shifts associated with the status quo of demographic change.
Politicians supporting
widespread amnesty for illegal aliens, said Coulter, were motivated by either
“corruption or stupidity” in their pursuit to “destroy our country.”
Demographic change is broadly
hidden from the public by both politicians and the news media, said Coulter,
while less pertinent issues are given undue focus. Proponents of
preserving and/or accelerating the rate of demographic change via both legal
and illegal immigration, she said, know they cannot win popular support for
their positions on the battlefield of ideas:
By and large, the Third World
immigration advocates, they know their best bet is — don’t let anybody talk
about it, don’t let anybody think about it, we don’t want people opening the
newspaper and saying, “Hmm, where’s the article on immigration?” We just don’t
want it even entering their minds — that’s their approach.
“Every time you allow Americans
to vote [on issues relating to immigration], every time it’s on the ballot …
they vote for less immigration [and] fewer benefits for immigrants,” said
Coulter, highlighting popular opposition to the status quo of both legal and
illegal immigration.
Coulter rejected left-wing
narratives of ethnic “diversity” as a social asset, drawing on comments made by the late
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew: “The more multi-ethnic a society
becomes, people stop voting on their social interests, their economic
interests; they vote on their ethnic group and I think that’s what the
Democrats are counting on.”
Breitbart News Daily airs weekdays on SiriusXM’s Patriot channel 125 between 6
a.m. and 9 a.m. Eastern.
LISTEN:
BLOG:
NETHER PARTY PLANS TO PASS IMMIGRATION REFORM BECAUSE CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT WORKS JUST AS WELL.
40 MILLION MEXICANS DID NOT JUMP OUR BORDERS, JOBS, WELFARE LINES AND VOTING BOOTHS BY ACCIDENT. IT WAS BY INVITATION!
44% of all DACA use
stolen social security numbers for stolen jobs
Idaho Is Fastest-Growing State
in U.S.
Charlie Litchfield/AP
Idaho has the fastest-growing population in
the United States, according to newly released data from the U.S. Census
Bureau.
Over the last year, the Census
Bureau concludes, Idaho’s population
increased by 2.2 percent, with now 1.7 million residents living in the state
that has one of the most racially homogeneous makeups.
Idaho was the nation’s fastest-growing
state in 2016. Its population increased 2.2% to 1.7 million. See new #population estimates
for your state here: https://go.usa.gov/xnUVu
Chief of the Population Estimates
Branch Luke Rogers said in a statement that domestic migration of Americans is
the reason behind Idaho’s population growth between July 2016 and July 2017.
“Domestic migration drove change
in the two fastest-growing states, Idaho and Nevada, while an excess of births
over deaths played a major part in the growth of the third fastest-growing
state, Utah,” Rogers said.
The U.S. Census Bureau found that
net international migration to the U.S. has continued growing the country’s
population –with 1.1 million foreign nationals being admitted over the last
year – with the overall U.S. population growing by 2.3 million individuals.
Every year, 1.5 million foreign
nationals arrive in the U.S. The foreign-born population, most recently, has
reached historic levels, with now more than 44 million immigrants residing in
the country, as Breitbart News reported.
BLOG: THEY HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY
MEXICANS POUR OVER OUR BORDERS, HOWEVER ESTIMATES ARE THAT FOR EACH
APPREHENDED, 8 ARE NEVER CAUGHT.
Mexico has the largest group of
legal and illegal foreign nationals in the U.S., with 1.1 million immigrants
from the country arriving in the U.S. between 2010 and 2016. Mexican nationals
make up roughly one in eight new arrivals to the U.S.
The largest increases from 2015 to
2016 to immigration to the U.S. have come from the Middle East, the Carribean,
Central America, and Sub-Saharan Africa.
The booming foreign-born
population is largely due to family-based chain migration, which was
established by the 1965 immigration legislation allowing new arrivals to the
U.S. to bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives with them.
Study: Immigrant Population in U.S.
Booms to 44M, Majority from Mexico
SANDY HUFFAKER/AFP/Getty Images
WASHINGTON, D.C. — There is now a record
level of immigrants living in the United States – standing at roughly 44
million people nationwide – who entered the U.S. both illegally and
legally from a foreign country.
Research conducted by the Center for
Immigration Studies’ Steven Camarota reveals the massive scope of the U.S.
immigrant population, which has contributed to keeping American wages stagnant
while driving up costs of social services.
Camarota’s research reveals that
in 2016, there were between 43 and 45 million immigrants in the U.S.,
nearly quadruple the immigrant population in 2000.
Mexico, as noted by Camarota, has
the largest group of legal and illegal foreign nationals in the U.S., with 1.1
million immigrants from the country arriving in the U.S. between 2010 and 2016.
Mexican nationals make up roughly one in eight new arrivals to the U.S.
Legal and illegal immigrants now
make up close to 14 percent of the entire U.S. population, or roughly one out
of every eight American residents. Camarota says this is the largest percentage
in 106 years.
The largest increases from 2015 to
2016 to immigration to the U.S. have come from the Middle East, the Carribean,
Central America, and Sub-Saharan Africa.
The booming foreign-born population
is largely due to family-based chain migration, which was established by the
1965 immigration legislation allowing new arrivals to the U.S. to bring their
foreign family members, spouses, children, and extended family to the U.S.
For instance, as Breitbart News has reported, on
average, for every new legal immigrant from Mexico, the immigrant brings six
relatives to the U.S. years later when they obtain U.S. citizenship.
President Trump and Attorney
General Jeff Sessions, most recently, have called for an end to chain
migration, slamming it for its negative impact on American workers and the
country’s working-class, who are often forced to compete with new arrivals for
blue-collar jobs.
“A merit-based system, by
definition, would be safer than a lottery or even extended family-based
immigration,” Sessions said during a speech in New York City, New York.
“We want the best and the brightest in America. The President’s plan is
essential to protecting our national security, while also banning drunk
drivers, fraudsters, gang members, and child abusers.”
Harvard University economist
George Borjas, an immigration expert, recently said the current family-based
chain migration system is “really hard to justify as a rational immigration
policy.”
CBO Says Senate DREAM Act Would Cost Taxpayers Billions
Friday afternoon bomb
By Andrew R. Arthur
CIS Immigration Blog, December 18, 2017
With respect to direct spending, CBO finds that S. 1615 would increase earned income and child tax credits by $5.5 billion between 2018 and 2027. It finds that the bill would increase spending for Medicaid by $5.0 billion during that period, and would increase direct spending for SNAP benefits by $2.3 billion in that timeframe. Direct spending for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits would increase by $900 million during that 10-year period under the bill. Finally, the bill would increase Social Security spending (which is off-budget) by $600 million, and Medicare spending by $300 million between 2018 and 2027. Federal direct spending for assistance for higher education would also increase, by $500 million in that timeframe under the bill, CBO estimates. Most significantly, however, "CBO and JCT estimate that enacting S. 1615 would increase outlays for subsidies for health insurance purchased through the marketplaces by $11.8 billion over the 2018-2027 period."
In reaching the $0.9 billion revenue increase figure, CBO assumes that more employees would work "on the books", and therefore report their income, increasing revenue, "mostly in the form of Social Security taxes, which are categorized as off-budget." It finds, however, that "increased reporting of employment income would result in increases in tax deductions by businesses. ... As a result, corporations would report lower taxable profits and pay less in income taxes." In addition: "Noncorporate businesses, such as partnerships and sole proprietorships, also would report lower taxable income, which would decrease individual income taxes paid by the partners and owners." Finally:
CIS Immigration Blog, December 18, 2017
With respect to direct spending, CBO finds that S. 1615 would increase earned income and child tax credits by $5.5 billion between 2018 and 2027. It finds that the bill would increase spending for Medicaid by $5.0 billion during that period, and would increase direct spending for SNAP benefits by $2.3 billion in that timeframe. Direct spending for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits would increase by $900 million during that 10-year period under the bill. Finally, the bill would increase Social Security spending (which is off-budget) by $600 million, and Medicare spending by $300 million between 2018 and 2027. Federal direct spending for assistance for higher education would also increase, by $500 million in that timeframe under the bill, CBO estimates. Most significantly, however, "CBO and JCT estimate that enacting S. 1615 would increase outlays for subsidies for health insurance purchased through the marketplaces by $11.8 billion over the 2018-2027 period."
In reaching the $0.9 billion revenue increase figure, CBO assumes that more employees would work "on the books", and therefore report their income, increasing revenue, "mostly in the form of Social Security taxes, which are categorized as off-budget." It finds, however, that "increased reporting of employment income would result in increases in tax deductions by businesses. ... As a result, corporations would report lower taxable profits and pay less in income taxes." In addition: "Noncorporate businesses, such as partnerships and sole proprietorships, also would report lower taxable income, which would decrease individual income taxes paid by the partners and owners." Finally:
. . .
CBO: Young Illegal
Immigrants Have Expensive Dreams
By Jason Richwine
CIS Immigration Blog, December 18, 2017
For most Americans, a Friday afternoon in mid-December is a time when work is winding down and holiday plans begin to take center stage. It also seems to be a time, coincidentally or not, for the government to publish reports that run counter to prevailing media narratives. Keeping with tradition, the CBO reported on Friday that the DREAM Act, which would provide amnesty to up to three million illegal immigrants who arrived before the age of 18, would generate a net cost of $26 billion over the next 10 years. Because advocates claim that virtually any loosening of immigration restrictions will benefit taxpayers — even refugees, despite their low earnings and high welfare consumption, are said to be fiscal boons — and because the media have been eager to run with that narrative, the CBO's estimate may come as a surprise.
In truth, however, it's hard to see how the analysis could have come out the other way. Young illegal immigrants — some of whom already have work permits, due to the Obama Administration's DACA program — currently pay most taxes, but cannot receive most federal benefits. Legalization is therefore bound to be costly. Furthermore, as a generally lower-skill population, DREAM Act beneficiaries will use more government services than average. The CBO estimates that the DREAM Act would generate about $1 billion of extra tax revenue from ending "off-the-books" labor, but that gain is swamped by $27 billion in new spending on benefits. The most expensive benefit enjoyed by Dream Act recipients would be Obamacare subsidies ($12 billion), followed by the earned income and child tax credits ($5.5 billion), Medicaid ($5 billion), and food stamps ($2 billion).
. . .
‘Dream Act’ Is Taxpayers’ Nightmare
By Bob Dane
ImmigrationReform.com,
December 19, 2017
. . .
S. 1615 would expand America’s welfare state by making up to 2
million deportable aliens eligible for a host of federal benefits — health
insurance subsidies, child tax credits, Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (a.k.a. food stamps) and higher education assistance, among
others.
CBO estimates the bill, introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., would increase the federal budget deficit by $26 billion over the next decade.
The DREAM Act doubles down on a U.S. immigration system that’s out of control, literally. President Donald Trump summed up the problem over the weekend.
“Our current immigration system helps special interests, but hurts American workers, taxpayers and national security,” Trump said in his weekly radio address.
FAIR calls the DREAM Act a prime example of dysfunction on Capitol Hill.
CBO estimates the bill, introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., would increase the federal budget deficit by $26 billion over the next decade.
The DREAM Act doubles down on a U.S. immigration system that’s out of control, literally. President Donald Trump summed up the problem over the weekend.
“Our current immigration system helps special interests, but hurts American workers, taxpayers and national security,” Trump said in his weekly radio address.
FAIR calls the DREAM Act a prime example of dysfunction on Capitol Hill.
. . .
Amnesty for the 'Best and Brightest' Will Still Cost Taxpayers
By Ira Mehlman
TheHill.com, December 20, 2017
. . .
What the CBO found was not encouraging for proponents of the
DREAM Act and downright disastrous to their broader goal of obtaining amnesty
for an estimated 12-15 million people living illegally in the United States.
Beneficiaries of the DREAM Act are described glowingly by their advocates and
many in the media as the best and brightest who, if their full potential could
be tapped, would enrich the nation and its treasury.
Not really.
According the CBO’s analysis, granting amnesty to the “best and the brightest” of the illegal alien population would represent an additional expense to the taxpayers who are already bearing a $135 billion annual burden as a result of large-scale illegal immigration. Rather than enriching our country, the CBO concluded that enactment of the DREAM Act would add nearly $27 billion to the deficit over the first decade, based on an assumption that just two million people would gain amnesty under the legislation.
Not really.
According the CBO’s analysis, granting amnesty to the “best and the brightest” of the illegal alien population would represent an additional expense to the taxpayers who are already bearing a $135 billion annual burden as a result of large-scale illegal immigration. Rather than enriching our country, the CBO concluded that enactment of the DREAM Act would add nearly $27 billion to the deficit over the first decade, based on an assumption that just two million people would gain amnesty under the legislation.
. . .
Chain Migration and DACA: An Explainer
By Theresa Cardinal Brown
Bipartisan Policy Center, December
15, 2017
How many individuals could DREAMers sponsor for green cards
under DREAMer Legislation?
The Migration Policy Institute (MPI) estimates that DREAMers
could sponsor an average of 0.65 to 1.03 family members under the parameters
set by the Recognizing America’s Children (RAC) Act, the 2017 DREAM Act, the
Hope Act, the SUCCEED Act, and the Border Security and Deferred Action
Recipient Relief Act. While other organizations have made claims that these
individuals would sponsor as many as six family members, these analyses assume
that DREAMers are similar to other green card holders, but DREAMers are less
likely to have non-U.S. family members than other immigrants.
First, MPI notes that DREAMers arrived in the United States as children, making it less likely that they would have children living outside the United States to be sponsored; their children would more likely be born in the United States, making them U.S. citizens. Because DREAMers grew up in the United States, it is also more likely that those who are married met their spouses in the United States, and that their spouses are U.S. citizens, green card holders, or fellow DREAMers. The undocumented parents of DREAMers may also have other U.S.-born citizen children who could sponsor them once they turn 21, meaning that the parent, if they were eligible, might be sponsored by someone other than the DREAMer. The most likely family members for DREAMers to sponsor would be siblings who reside out of the country–a category that has extremely large backlogs and decades-long wait times, especially for Mexico, where the most DREAMers are from. In short, demographic profiles of this population would likely lead them to sponsor fewer family members over time.
First, MPI notes that DREAMers arrived in the United States as children, making it less likely that they would have children living outside the United States to be sponsored; their children would more likely be born in the United States, making them U.S. citizens. Because DREAMers grew up in the United States, it is also more likely that those who are married met their spouses in the United States, and that their spouses are U.S. citizens, green card holders, or fellow DREAMers. The undocumented parents of DREAMers may also have other U.S.-born citizen children who could sponsor them once they turn 21, meaning that the parent, if they were eligible, might be sponsored by someone other than the DREAMer. The most likely family members for DREAMers to sponsor would be siblings who reside out of the country–a category that has extremely large backlogs and decades-long wait times, especially for Mexico, where the most DREAMers are from. In short, demographic profiles of this population would likely lead them to sponsor fewer family members over time.
. . .
Will DREAMers Crowd U.S.-Born Millennials Out of Jobs?
By Jeanne Batalova and Michael Fix
Migration Policy Institute, December 2017
The sectoral distribution of employed DACA recipients differs in significant ways from the millennial workforce in general, and White, Black, Asian, and U.S.-born Hispanic workers, in particular. These differentiated employment patterns likely reduce direct competition.
For example, DACA recipients were more likely than millennials overall to work in hospitality (23 percent versus 16 percent) and construction (11 percent versus 6 percent). Shares of Blacks, Asians, U.S.-born Hispanics, and Whites were all lower than the share of DACA workers in these industries (see Figure 2).
DACA participants were less likely than all other millennials, regardless of their race/ethnicity, to work in education, health, and social services. At the same time, Black and U.S.-born Hispanic millennials were more likely to work in retail trade than DACA recipients (19 percent versus 14 percent). In this case, we focus on DACA recipients rather than on DREAM-eligible young adults because the former already have work permits. DACA recipients represent the core of the DREAM-eligible millennial population, and their industries of employment provide a reasonable prediction of future sectoral distribution of other DREAMers.
. . .
No DREAM, No Deal
How many Democrats will do what’s right and refuse to pass a budget unless Congress authorizes a clean Dream Act?
By Steve Phillips
Not all Democrats are so
resolute, however, and their ambivalence calls into question their conscience
and their courage. There are few issues as morally clear-cut as the situation
of the Dreamers. These are children, living, in most cases, in the only country
they’ve known as home. Even if one accepts this country’s immigration laws as
legitimate (something hard to do in a country where the racial superiority of
whites was the defining component of immigration policy from 1790 until 1965),
these young people are blameless. But the Trump administration has struck fear
and uncertainty into the lives of millions of people with its promise to send
armed government agents to round up children and ship them out of this country.
“Unconscionable” is too soft a word to describe a situation that quite
literally evokes prior periods in US history when government-backed slave
catchers pursued a different era’s dark-skinned residents.
. . .
Watch: DACA Illegal Aliens Turn
on Democrat Tim Kaine After Failing to Shut Down Govt over Amnesty
Open borders activists are turning on
Democrats for not voting to shut down the federal government to give amnesty to
nearly 800,000 illegal aliens shielded from deportation by the President
Obama-created Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
Following the passage of a
year-end spending bill that did not include the increasingly unpopular amnesty for DACA
illegal aliens, protesters made up of open borders advocates and illegal aliens
flooded the office of Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), chanting “Shame on Kaine!” after
the Senator did not vote to shut down the federal government.
For months, the open borders lobby
has demanded House and Senate Democrats shut down the federal government in
order to give the nearly 800,000 DACA illegal aliens an end-of-the-year amnesty
before March 2018 when the program will officially end.
After being defeated this month,
the Republican establishment has already made clear that they will seek to push
an amnesty for DACA illegal aliens in January 2018.
REALITY OF THE LA RAZA – UNDIOSus FASCICST PARTY
IN AMERICA:
"If the racist "Sensenbrenner
Legislation" passes the US Senate, there is no doubt that a massive civil
disobedience movement will emerge. Eventually labor union power can merge with
the immigrant civil rights and "Immigrant Sanctuary" movements
to enable us to either form a new political party or to do heavy duty reforming
of the existing Democratic Party. The next and final steps would follow and
that is to elect our own governors of all the states within Aztlan."
Mexican Invasion
By Tom Barrett
At the current rate of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also
through Canada) the United States will be completely over run with illegal aliens
by the year 2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants who follow US law to
become citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion, ILLEGAL
aliens and their offspring will be the dominant population in the United
States.
“CHEAP” LABOR ILLEGALS COST Legals OF MEX-OCCUPIED CA $50
BILLION PER YEAR
"Because of the successful cheap-labor
strategy, wages for men have remained flat since 1973, and a large percentage of the nation’s annual income has shifted to
investors and away from employees." NEIL MUNRO
THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY DEMOCRAT PARTY:
The
Democratic Party used to be the party of blue collar
America- supporting laws and policies that benefitted that segment of the U.S.
population. Their leaders may still claim to be advocates for American
working families, however their duplicitous actions that betray American
workers and their families, while undermining national security and public
safety, provide clear and incontrovertible evidence of their lies…. MICHAEL
CUTLER …FRONTPAGE mag
THE
MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA in AMERICA IS NOW CALLED “UNIDOSus
Despite
the fact that the majority of documented hispanics oppose illegal immigration,
as do the majority of Americans, Aztlan and La Raza race hate groups have
become the self-appointed voice for a separatist movement that threatens a
violent overthrow of the Constitutional system and a barbaric program of ethnic
cleansing. This is held up by the media as 'diversity' and to vociferously
oppose it is scorned as racism.
“For decades, the American people have begged and pleaded with
their government for a lawful system of immigration that serves the national
interest—a system that has as its foremost priorities their safety, their jobs,
and their well-being,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said. “The current
immigration system is easily abused by fraudsters and nefarious actors, and
that’s certainly true of the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program. If the fraud is
not detected and swift enforcement actions are not taken, chain migration only
multiplies the consequences of this abuse. Unfortunately, there are many
instances of fraud across our immigration system. The American people deserve a
better system that works for them, and the Department of Justice will continue
its efforts to deliver one to them.” ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS
THE INVITED INVADING HORDES:
“That Washington-imposed policy of
mass-immigration floods the
market with foreign labor, spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by
blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate prices, widens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million
marginalized Americans and
their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.” ---- NEIL MUNRO
December
26, 2017
Are all DREAMers Students and Soldiers?
Advocates
for legalizing the children of illegal aliens try to make the case that most DREAMers
are worthy of amnesty. Many are students or members of the military who deserve
a chance to succeed in America.
This
may be true. But the demographic reality is far different than the media would
have us believe. And that reality points to assimilation problems with
DREAMers that is rarely discussed.
Watching television reports concerning Dreamers,
one would think that the DACA program applied only to college-educated
immigrants who were just a few years old when their parents brought them into
the country illegally. We are led to believe that most are so fully
Americanized that they would now have trouble speaking their native language
and are all but ignorant of their birth countries’ cultural norms. Thus, we are
supposed to believe, returning them to their native lands would be a cruel
hardship.
In fact, many DACA beneficiaries came here as
teenagers. All were eligible for the program as long as they entered the U.S.
before their 16th birthday. By that time, there is no doubt that they spoke the
language of their native countries fluently and knew their culture intimately.
DACA had no requirement of English fluency, as
evidenced by the application form that had a space to list the translator used
to complete the form. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that
“perhaps 24 percent of the DACA-eligible population fall into the functionally
illiterate category and another 46 percent have only ‘basic’ English ability.”
Unfortunately, many Dreamers are poorly educated.
Only 49 percent of DACA beneficiaries have a high school education, even though
a majority are now adults. And while military service could also qualify an
illegal alien for DACA, out of the current 690,000 DACA beneficiaries, only 900
are serving in the military.
The Obama administration did not check the
background of each DACA beneficiary, despite a requirement that they have no
felony convictions and pose no threat to national security. Only a few randomly
selected DACA applicants were ever actually vetted.
This may explain why, by August this year, more
than 2,100 DACA beneficiaries had had their eligibility pulled because of
criminal convictions and gang affiliation. Even if a random background
investigation produced substantial evidence that an illegal alien might have
committed multiple crimes, the alien would still be eligible for DACA if he
wasn’t convicted.
Thus, it seems that a significant percentage of
DACA beneficiaries have serious limitations in their education, work experience
and English fluency. What’s the likelihood that they’ll be able to function in
American society without being substantial burdens to U.S. taxpayers?
A
minimum requirement for illegal immigrants to be made legal should be an
ability to support oneself. That so many cannot master the English language
should give Congress pause when considering allowing millions of nearly
illiterate, non-English speaking DREAMers to remain in the US with their
illegal parents. Not every DREAMer can work at a company where most employees
speak Spanish. The English requirement should be non-negotiable or we will end
up with another permanent underclass, wholly dependent on the government to
live.
This
is a situation that calls for examining each case on an individual basis rather
than granting mass amnesty to a class of illegal immigrant. Criminals,
illiterates, and Spanish-only speaking DREAMers need to be excluded from any
consideration for being granted legal status. Otherwise, we literally open the
door to more illegal immigration.
‘Dreamer’-age Illegals Have Crime Rate Double Young Americans, Says Report
DACA-aged illegals commit crimes at twice the rate of young Americans, says a comprehensive summary of crimes and convictions in Arizona during the past 32 years.
The report punctures claims by pro-amnesty advocates that young ‘dreamer’ illegals are vital to U.S. industry and civic life, and indicate that any amnesty will ensure that many more crimes — including murders and rapes — will be inflicted against Americans and legal immigrants, including Hispanics and blacks.
The report says:
Unfortunately, if the goal of DACA is to give citizenship to a particularly law-abiding group of undocumented immigrants, it is accomplishing the opposite of what was intended. As Table 8 shows, DACA age eligible undocumented immigrants are 250% more likely to be convicted of crimes than their share of the population. Those too old for DACA status are convicted at a relatively low rates (45.7% more than their share of the Arizona population).
The summary of the report, titled “Undocumented Immigrants, U.S. Citizens, and Convicted Criminals in Arizona,” says:
Using newly released detailed data on all prisoners who entered the Arizona state prison from January 1985 through June 2017, we are able to separate non-U.S. citizens by whether they are illegal or legal residents. These data do not rely on self-reporting by criminals. Undocumented immigrants are at least 142% more likely to be convicted of a crime than other Arizonans. They also tend to commit more serious crimes and serve 10.5% longer sentences, more likely to be classified as dangerous, and 45% more likely to be gang members than U.S. citizens …If undocumented immigrants committed crime nationally as they do in Arizona, in 2016 they would have been responsible for over 1,000 more murders, 5,200 rapes, 8,900 robberies, 25,300 aggravated assaults, and 26,900 burglaries.
The report was prepared by John R. Lott Jr. at the Crime Prevention Research Center, in Alexandria, Va. He told Breitbart News:
The data there shows the convictions for everybody who entered the prisons system from January 1985 through June of this last year … It just shows that certain groups are convicted at much higher rates than their share of the population … [roughly 75 percent] of the crime committed by undocumented immigrants or illegal aliens is committed by those who are 15 to 35 years of age.
Legal immigrants are very different from illegal immigrants, he said.
Illegal immigrants are being convicted at very high rates compared to their share of the population. Legal immigrants appear to be fairly law-abiding, and are convicted at low rates compared to their share of the population.
The database used for the report does not describe the race or ethnic identity of the victim, but national data shows that most victims are part of the same group as their criminals, he said. Lott added:
What tends to happen across all the different racial groups is that criminals are of the similar race as the victim … the crime literature [shows] that victims tend to be similar to the perpetrators of the crimes … Obviously, a larger share of the victims will also be undocumented illegal aliens.
Unsurprisingly, polls show that many legal immigrants want stronger border security. In 2014, for example, a pro-amnesty poll funded by Mark Zuckerberg showed that 78 percent of Hispanic respondents support “substantially increasing security among US-Mexican border.”
Asked to rebut likely criticisms of the crime report, Lott said he had seen few criticisms so far. “I don’t know what people will say — it seems like a straightforward set of numbers,” he said.
However, he noted that the report does not include any data about unreported crimes. “That raises the possibility that a lot of crimes are not reported … looking at convictions might provide you with an underestimate of the crime these illegals have committed.”
Lott’s report sheds more light on the 3.25 million ‘dreamers’ who would be the beneficiaries of an amnesty now being pushed by Democratic politicians, business-first GOP legislators, and cheap-labor business groups.
Pro-amnesty groups frequently portray the young illegals as a gain for the American society. Illegal migrants “embody the best of our nation,” Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the Democrats in the House of Representatives, said in December.
But that pitch is contradicted by Lott’s crime data, by the self-reported earnings of the migrants, their very poor education [less than 2 percent have college degrees) and by the very beneficial economic impact for Americans of excluding illegal immigrants.
In Arizona, for example, labor and immigration reforms began in 2004, and the state’s population of roughly 450,000 illegals gradually dropped by roughly 180,000 people from 2007 to 2012. Because of the 40 percent drop in illegal labor, the wages earned by Americans rose significantly, said a subsequent study by Moody’s Analytics. According to the Wall Street Journal report on the study:
The median income of low-skilled whites who did manage to get jobs rose about 6% during that period, the economists estimate … wages rose about 15% for Arizona farmworkers and about 10% for construction between 2010 and 2014 … Some employers say their need for workers has increased since then, leading them to boost wages more rapidly and crimping their ability to expand … graduates [at a federal job-training center] now often mull two or three jobs offers from construction firms and occasionally start at $14.65 an hour instead of $10 … At DTR Landscape Development LLC, the firm’s president, Dick Roberts, says he has increased his starting wage by 60% to $14.50 an hour because he is having trouble finding reliable workers.
The departure of foreign migrants also cut the state government’s welfare costs by roughly $430 million per year, the WSJ reported.
The number of students enrolled in intensive English courses in Arizona public schools fell from 150,000 in 2008 to 70,000 in 2012 and has remained constant since. Schooling 80,000 fewer students would save the state roughly $350 million a year, by one measure … annual emergency-room spending on noncitizens fell 37% to $106 million, from $167 million. And between 2010 and 2014, the annual cost to state prisons of incarcerating noncitizens convicted of felonies fell 11% to $180 million, from $202 million.
Housing costs also dropped, making it much easier for better-paid young Americans to marry, have children and launch themselves into a middle-class life.
“It was like, ‘Where did everybody go?’ ” says Teresa Acuna, a Phoenix real-estate agent who works in Latino neighborhoods. Real-estate agent Patti Gorski says her sales records show that prices of homes owned by Spanish-speaking customers fell by 63% between 2007 and 2010, compared with a 44% drop for English-speaking customers, a difference she attributes partly to financial pressure on owners who had been renting homes to immigrants who departed.
The rising wages and loss of cheap labor also forced local companies to invent or buy new machinery that will boost productivity and allow farms to beat their low-wage, labor-intensive, foreign competition.
After Arizona passed a series of tough anti-immigration laws, Rob Knorr couldn’t find enough Mexican field hands to pick his jalapeño peppers. He sharply reduced his acreage and invested $2 million developing a machine to remove pepper stems. His goal was to cut the number of laborers he needed by 90% and to hire higher-paid U.S. machinists instead …
He says mechanization is his future. He continues to pour time and money into a laser-guided device to remove stems from peppers, which pickers now do by hand in the field. Another farmer in the area developed a mechanical carrot harvester.Mr. Knorr says he is willing to pay $20 an hour to operators of harvesters and other machines, compared with about $13 an hour for field hands. He says he can hire skilled machinists at community colleges, so he can rely less on migrant labor.
Four million Americans turn 18 each year and begin looking for good jobs in the free market.
But the federal government inflates the supply of new labor by annually accepting 1 million new legal immigrants, by providing work-permits to roughly 3 million resident foreigners, and by doing little to block the employment of roughly 8 million illegal immigrants.
The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration floods the market with foreign labor, spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate prices, widens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.
The cheap-labor policy has also reduced investment and job creation in many interior states because the coastal cities have a surplus of imported labor. For example, almost 27 percent of zip codes in Missouri had fewer jobs or businesses in 2015 than in 2000, according to a new report by the Economic Innovation Group. In Kansas, almost 29 percent of zip codes had fewer jobs and businesses in 2015 compared to 2000, which was a two-decade period of massive cheap-labor immigration.
Because of the successful cheap-labor strategy, wages for men have remained flat since 1973, and a large percentage of the nation’s annual income has shifted to investors and away from employees.
No comments:
Post a Comment