Friday, February 23, 2018

SPENCER P MORRISON - AMNESTY WILL HURT AMERICAN MILLENNIALS MOST...... Legals still get the tax bills for Mexico's welfare state and crime tidal wave

DACA Amnesty Will Hurt American Millennials Most

By Spencer P Morrison

National Economics Editorial, February 20, 2018

It must also be noted that illegal immigrants are a net burden on taxpayers, consuming far more in government subsidies than they contribute in taxes. This translates directly into higher taxes for American citizens, which includes millennials. Consider that California—home to 10-12 million immigrants— is America’s poorest state. Its poverty rate is double the national average, its income inequality is higher than Mexico’s, and it “home” to America’s largest homeless population. And yet, in a perverse twist, California is also America’s second most heavily taxed state.

In the end, millennials will have to make a choice: will they prioritize their own well-being, or will they surrender the fruits of their inheritance to foreign citizens?

. . .
https://nationaleconomicseditorial.com/2018/02/20/daca-hurts-millennials/


When Deportations Create More Jobs For Black Workers


This is a strange story out of Chicago which popped last week and really deserves a closer look by everyone. A bakery on the Northwest Side of the Windy City was sold off recently, starting a firestorm of controversy in the community. The Cloverhill Bakery, operating at three different locations, was a major supplier of snack cakes and related baked goods for Little Debbie, but that customer “walked away” after the bakery could no longer fulfill their orders. The reason? ICE had conducted an audit and found that more than 800 primarily Hispanic workers, many employed through a temp agency, were in the country illegally or otherwise using stolen or forged identification. The workers who didn’t immediately take off on their own had to be let go and production plummeted.
Sounds like a disaster, right? But it gets more complicated. Hostess is in the process of buying the bakeries and hiring new workers. Given the location and employment requirements, nearly all of the new workers, largely coming from a different temp agency, are African-American. The complications come in with the fact that some activists are now painting this as some sort of racial confrontation which is being generated by the corporation. This article from the Chicago Sun-Timespaints it in the worst possible terms, describing it as the black and Hispanic communities “being pitted against each other.” But if you read down into the details you’ll see that something remarkable has happened. (Emphasis added)
In 2015, under the Obama administration, ICE inspected the documentation of Labor Network’s employees at Cloverhill. In May 2017, the Trump administration sent letters to about 800 employees, saying they weren’t authorized to work in the United States, records examined by the Chicago Sun-Times show.
Those Hispanic employees didn’t return to work, leaving the bakery desperate to fill their jobs. So the company turned to another placement agency, Metro Staff Inc., and it provided Cloverhill with workers screened through the government’s “E-Verification” program. Most of those new employees are African American.
According to a former consultant to the bakery, MSI paid the black workers $14 an hour, versus the $10 an hour the Mexican workers were making through Labor Network.
The consultant, Felix Okwusa, says the bakery offered its remaining Hispanic workers a $1-an-hour premium to train the black replacement workers.
Despite efforts in the media and among community organizers to paint this as either some sort of “Trump hates immigrants” or divisive race war story, this may turn out to be a huge win for Chicago. First of all, this was an illegal immigration investigation started under Obama, so you can forget about the Trump line. What really counts is the results.
Once ICE sent out those letters, hundreds of illegal aliens knew that their number was up and simply disappeared. The agency who was placing all of them wasn’t following the rules and placing illegals in jobs, so they need to be investigated also. But the owners went through a different agency which uses E-Verify and replaced all of those workers with citizens.
Remember those previous stories about black unemployment dropping over the past year? This is a largely black community so guess who was getting all of those jobs? And they’re making four dollars an hour more than the positions previously paid because of the supply and demand rules of the labor market. Would anyone care to tell me how this is “a bad thing” when hundreds of new jobs with very modest skill and education requirements open up for African-American workers at wages well above the minimum?
The Sun-Times article goes on to air some complaints (which frankly sound totally racist to me) about how the turnover rate among the new workers is higher and how the “immigrants” were willing to do this work for less money. That’s an incredible complaint. They were working for less because they are in the country illegally. By hiring actual citizens, the company avoids breaking the law even if they’re forced to pay a bit more to fill all of those positions.
The tale of Cloverhill Bakery is being depicted as some sort of racial atrocity or deportation forces gone wild, but it’s actually a success story. We need more housecleaning operations such as this, not fewer.


NumbersUSA’s Rosemary Jenks:

 

E-Verify Ignored in DACA Negotiations Because ‘Members of Congress Know It Will Work’


by ROBERT KRAYCHIK23 Jan 2018

Members of Congress broadly oppose a legislative nationwide E-Verify mandate for employers because “they know it will work,” said NumbersUSA’s Rosemary Jenks, explaining why E-Verify is not being pushed in congressional negotiations for an amnesty deal for recipients of the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Jenks further noted that both parties are beholden to special interests supportive of “mass migration.”


DEATH BY CORRUPTION:

What caused the destruction of the Democrat Party in America?

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/07/peter-beinart-how-democrats-lost-their.html

PARTNER WITH MEXICO, the LA RAZA DEMOCRAT PARTY and the PRO-BUSINESS GOP to keep wages for LEGALS depressed (today they are depressed to 1973 levels).

But you will still get the tax bills for the Mex welfare state and crime tidal wave!


“Illegal aliens are not supposed to work, and knowingly providing shelter for illegal aliens can be construed as harboring and shielding, elements of a felony under federal law, Title 8 U.S. Code § 1324.”  

“Where aliens and jobs are concerned, even many categories of nonimmigrant aliens (temporary visitors) including aliens who lawfully enter under the Visa Waiver Program or with tourist visas may not work in the United States and immediately become subject to removal (deportation) if they seek gainful employment.”  ----MICHAEL CUTLER – FRONTPAGE mag

"Critics argue that giving amnesty to 12 to 30 million illegal aliens in the U.S. would have an immediate negative impact on America’s working and middle class — specifically black Americans and the white working class — who would be in direct competition for blue-collar jobs with the largely low-skilled illegal alien population." JOHN BINDER
*
"Additionally, under current legal immigration laws, if given amnesty, the illegal alien population would be allowed to bring an unlimited number of their foreign relatives to the U.S. This population could boost already high legal immigration levels to an unprecedented high. An amnesty for illegal aliens would also likely triple the number of border-crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border." JOHN BINDER
*
“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”…. Tom Barrett 

 


95 MILLION AMERICANS (Legals) HAVE NO WORK AS THE BORDERS ARE FLOODED WITH FOREIGNERS SUCKING UP JOBS, WELFARE AND VOTING DEMOCRAT FOR MORE!




JOE LEGAL v LA RAZA JOSE ILLEGAL
Here’s how it breaks down; will make you want to be an illegal!


THE DEVASTATING COST OF MEXICO’S WELFARE STATE IN AMERICA’S OPEN BORDERS
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/10/spencer-p-morrison-devastating-cost-of.html


America Could Cut Immigration by 90 Percent & Retain 100 Percent of the Economic Benefits



h1-b visa workers wages have risen five times faster than those of american workers

Applying the Pareto Principle to the Immigration Debate

Have you ever noticed that most of the people you work with are useless?  Sure they seem busy, but most of them get precious little done.  In fact, some of even them end up making work for model employees, like you—don’t they?
If you’ve experienced this, then you understand how the Pareto Principle works—you just didn’t know it had a name.  Also known as the 80:20 rule, the Pareto Principle stands for the idea that causality is not always linear: that is, there is not always a one-to-one relationship between cause and effect; instead, the exceptional few are to thank for producing the majority of output.

In his book Outliers, author and columnist Malcolm Gladwell notes that the business world is dominated by outliers—the exceptional few.  Consider how the market capitalization of America’s biggest companies follows a non-linear distribution, ie. the Fortune 500 are worth more than the countless millions of smaller businesses.
Another classic example is the distribution of wealth: the top 20 percent of households own 77 percent of all wealth in America.  Interestingly, Pareto distributions are often fractal in nature, meaning that they look the same no matter what scale you view them.  For example, the wealth distribution in the top 20 percent of households resembles the distribution of the whole—the top 4 percent of earners control ~80 percent of the wealth, and so on and so forth.
Why am I telling you this?  Because the Pareto Principle is a very powerful but often ignored political tool.  Let’s apply Pareto to the immigration debate.  On the one hand, pro-immigration publications like The Economist argues that immigration grows the economy.  This is undoubtedly true, but it’s not the whole story.
The Pareto Principle predicts that only a small fraction of immigrants contribute to the economy—the vast majority of immigrants are either economically neutral, or detract from America’s economy.  This means that America should (hypothetically) be able to cut immigration by 80 percent while still retaining all the economic advantages of immigration.  If true, this fact
(i) should be enough to broker a compromise between the Democrats and Republicans on immigration reform or
(ii) it will expose the Democrats’ motivations retarding immigration (ie. whether they really care about the economy, or whether this is just a red herring as I suspect).
That’s the theory anyways.  But what does the data say?
In 2017 the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicinereleased the most detailed study on the economics of immigration in America to date.  It is over 600 pages long, and was authored by an interdisciplinary team—it is the “gold standard” of academic papers on the subject.  The report found a number of interesting data.  For example, the researchers found that nearly 100 percent of immigration-driven economic growth accrued to the immigrants themselves—not to American citizens.  That is, immigration grew the economic pie, but did nothing to grow the slices.
The researchers also found that immigration contributes to wage stagnation for American workers.  This point should be obvious to anyone familiar with the law of supply and demand: a relatively bigger labor supply means lower wages, just as a relatively large supply of apples means cheaper apples.  This is consistent with other studies done by the Center for Immigration Studies, which found that mass (especially illegal) immigration is one of the primary reasons wages for black Americans have stagnated.


how immigrants entered america, raise act, immigration reform
How immigrants entered America (2016).

Regarding Pareto: the Academies’ research also shows that the economic impact of immigrants follows a non-linear distribution.  That is, a few hyper-productive immigrants generate most of the economic growth, while the majority of immigrants break-even, or are actually a net drain on America’s economy.
In fact, roughly 47 percent of immigrants are a net drain on public revenue—they consume more in government services than they contribute in taxes.  The study pegs their net present value cost at $170,000.
Net present value (NPV) is a bizarre metric that actually underestimates the real costs of non-economic immigrants.  This is because NPV is a measure of how much money the government would need to invest today, at a yield of inflation plus 3 percent, to pay for said immigrant’s tax deficit over the course of their lifetime.
Of course, the government does not do this—it spends only as it receives.  According to an analysis done by the Heritage Foundation, each non-economic immigrant more realistically costs a net of $476,000 in welfare payouts.  As such, the true cost of immigration is higher than even the Academies’ research leads us to believe.
In any event, half of all immigrants are actually a drain on America’s economy.  As for the other half, most of them contribute as much as they receive.  In fact, only about 15 percent of immigrants to America contribute to the economy in a meaningful way—this small minority is the economic engine of immigration.  These are the people the liberals say America so desperately needs, and on this fact I agree.
America needs immigrants.  They grow the economy and enrich our culture.  Just think about how different life would be without the contributions of men like Nassim Taleb or Arnold Schwarzenegger.  That being said, we must remembers that these men are the exceptional few—they are the Pareto outliers who would not be affected by immigration reform, at least not as it is articulated under the RAISE Act.
If Democrats honestly support immigration for economic reasons, then immigration should be a bipartisan issue in light of this data.  If not, Pareto gives Republicans yet another tool to lambaste the left.  Either way, conservatives would be wise to begin thinking in non-linear terms.

No comments: