Immigration ad running on Fox

[Brian4Liberty]

Was very surprised to see this ad running on Fox today. Some of you will like it, some will not. Supply and demand...

YouTube - Ill-Legal Workers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ryd1-xco9cg)

http://www.capsweb.org/

[Zippyjuan]

Doesn't surprise me that Fox would run such an ad. Anti-imigrant isses are promoted by most of their commentators. We have to blame somebody for our problems, don't we?

[olehounddog]

population stabilization could mean something bad.

[Brian4Liberty]

population stabilization could mean something bad.

In this context, it's basically a combination of standard of living, jobs and sustainability from the conservative standpoint. You won't find this group hanging out with the Green Party, the Sierra Club or the Democrats, who all refuse to acknowledge that immigration/population has anything to do with those issues...

[tremendoustie]

Was very surprised to see this ad running on Fox today. Some of you will like it, some will not. Supply and demand...

YouTube - Ill-Legal Workers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ryd1-xco9cg)

http://www.capsweb.org/

Based on an absolutely infantile understanding of economics ... as if there's a fixed number of jobs we're all scrapping over. Just absurd.

[axiomata]

The fallacious claim that these activists are interested in stemming only illegal immigration becomes more obvious.

[Brian4Liberty]

The fallacious claim that these activists are interested in stemming only illegal immigration becomes more obvious.

This group (and related groups) have always been concerned with immigration (both legal and illegal) increasing the population and labor pool, and they have been around much longer than the "only illegals" talking point.

It's politicians and others that have more recently used this "it's only illegals" BS.

[Brian4Liberty]

Based on an absolutely infantile understanding of economics ... as if there's a fixed number of jobs we're all scrapping over. Just absurd.

So your theory is that the number of jobs never stagnates or decreases?

[axiomata]

So your theory is that the number of jobs never stagnates or decreases?

The number of jobs is dependent on the price of jobs. They call it a supply curve and not a supply point for a reason.

Also, economics is not a zero sum game.

[Brian4Liberty]

The number of jobs is dependent on the price of jobs.

And many other factors.



They call it a supply curve and not a supply point for a reason.


At any point in time, you are at a point on the curve.



Also, economics is not a zero sum game.

Of course. And the economy is not always guaranteed to expand. It can also contract.

[PeacePlan]

I have a friend that closed his roofing business where he hired 12 legal roofers (Americans). He paid them 20 bucks an hour to roof for him. Well he told me that there were a bunch of roofers that started hiring illegals and they paid them such a low wage he could not win any bids as they underbid him and he could not compete. So he ended up closing his business and his 12 employees no longer had a job.

The way I see it they lower wages for legal Americans and take away their jobs.

[Zippyjuan]

As the number of jobs in this country has contracted, the number of aliens in this country has also contracted- at a rate of a net reduction of illegals of a million people a year. The supply adjusting to the demand. From September:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/09/01/1803885/illegal-immigration-in-sharp-decline.html


``Jobs are scarce, and the jobs we can find are more difficult to get because bosses want to see your immigration documents,'' Guevara said.

Nationally, the most dramatic evidence of the decline is a comparison of undocumented migrant arrivals in two different periods. From 2000 to 2005, when the economy was booming, an average of 850,000 migrants per a year sneaked into the United States or overstayed their visas, according to the Pew report. But as the economy worsened between 2007 and 2009, the flow of arrivals dipped to an average of 300,000 per year.

``The flow is down over two thirds during this decade,'' said Jeffrey S. Passel, one of the authors and a Pew Hispanic Center senior demographer. ``As a result of the greatly diminished inflows, we've seen a reversal in what had been a long-term growth in the unauthorized immigrant population.''

At the same time, the report said, more undocumented migrants may be leaving. But the researchers said they did not have a ``precise estimation'' on how many migrants have left, died or became legal residents.

Nevertheless, the report said, the overall number of undocumented migrants continues to decline.

DOWN FROM PEAK

The Pew report put the total number of ``unauthorized immigrants'' in the country at 11.1 million, down from a peak of 12 million in March 2007. In 2008, a Pew report confirmed the decline in undocumented immigrants, a trend first detected by researchers at another Washington think tank -- the Center for Immigration Studies.

A January report by the Department of Homeland Security's office of immigration statistics also said the number of undocumented immigrants was dropping, and put the total figure at 10.8 million -- slightly less than Pew.



Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/09/01/1803885/illegal-immigration-in-sharp-decline.html#ixzz17abA4eFA

The total number of people currently collecting unemployment in all programs (state and federal) was about 9 million for the week ending November 27th of this year. The estimated total number of illegal aliens (according to DHS) is about 10.8 million- and that includes those not working ie children. If you got rid of every illegal person in the country and gave any job they had to somebody on unemployment (assuming they were willing and able to do the work!) you would not be able to get rid of everybody on unemployment.

[Zippyjuan]

I have a friend that closed his roofing business where he hired 12 legal roofers (Americans). He paid them 20 bucks an hour to roof for him. Well he told me that there were a bunch of roofers that started hiring illegals and they paid them such a low wage he could not win any bids as they underbid him and he could not compete. So he ended up closing his business and his 12 employees no longer had a job.

The way I see it they lower wages for legal Americans and take away their jobs.

That is an argument also made by Unions vs non- union labor or local merchants when Walmart wants to come to town. Others will say you should suck it up- you are already paid too much. If somebody is willing to do the job for less, why not? But that means that you have less money to spend at the barber or grocer or hardware store and support jobs at those businesses. Lowering your wages will also indirectly help lower everybody else's wages as well.

[PeacePlan]

That is an argument also made by Unions vs non- union labor or local merchants when Walmart wants to come to town. Others will say you should suck it up- you are already paid too much. If somebody is willing to do the job for less, why not? But that means that you have less money to spend at the barber or grocer or hardware store and support jobs at those businesses. Lowering your wages will also indirectly help lower everybody else's wages as well.

Here are the facts - we have 12 people that lost their jobs. Now if it were a company that hired people that were legal and did the work cheaper I would agree with you. Your reasoning does not take into consideration my rights as an American. This is my country and I elected people to pass laws that you may not like. When they come here illegally they are trespassing on my country.

Do you believe in property rights? How about trespassing on your land?

I would not like it if you just walked into my house and I don't like it that these people walk into my country uninvited either. Leave and please come back when you can follow the invitation (immigration) instructions.

You should leave your door to your house open and let everyone that wants walk in. You have no consideration that I consider this my country my land and I voted for people to make laws to govern it. Immigration laws are part of my country.

[Brian4Liberty]

That is an argument also made by Unions vs non- union labor or local merchants when Walmart wants to come to town.

Despite what Union members know, Union leaders and establishment understand that massive immigration is good for them (the Union itself and it's leaders, bureaucrats and leeches). Too much labor creates demand for Unions. Less pay, more abuse of employees creates that demand.

When labor is scarce, each individual is valued more, and can easily move around in the workforce. There is no need for Unions.

[Adolfo Mena Gonzalez]

Doesn't surprise me that Fox would run such an ad. Anti-imigrant isses are promoted by most of their commentators. We have to blame somebody for our problems, don't we?

Why does America need more immigrants? Do you just believe in total anarchy and open borders? Surely, you recognize that America is in a recession. And as such, we don't need an influx of third world labor to depreciate wages and suck up public services they don't pay for and to drive more Americans to the welfare rolls. We cannot afford more unemployment and more public debt. Without even addressing the cultural, social and political consequences of mass immigration, the economic consequences alone should be able to dissuade any reasonable person from support uncontrolled third world immigration

[Vessol]

Protectionist economics is what started the libertarian movement back in the 19th century. Yet so many so called libertarians here somehow think protectionist economics is the way to go.

This is like Americans demanding to rejoin the British Crown. It's absurd and totally contradictory.

Protectionist economics is anti-liberty.

[Adolfo Mena Gonzalez]

Protectionist economics is what started the libertarian movement back in the 19th century. Yet so many so called libertarians here somehow think protectionist economics is the way to go.

This is like Americans demanding to rejoin the British Crown. It's absurd and totally contradictory.

Protectionist economics is anti-liberty.

I agree that Mercantalism, that is, state ownership, protectionism, subsidies etc, sparked a popular movement in support of Liberal Economics. It had nothing to do with immigration, so I don't see the correlation.

I don't see immigration controls as contradictory to libertarian principles. I don't think committing national suicide is a libertarian principle, I think it is an anarchist principle. I don't think importing more statist, economically leftist and generally socially conservative third world immigrants is going to help the liberty movement politically. Driving wages down and Americans out of work to grow the welfare rolls just expands the welfare state. The welfare state is also expanded through chain migration which allows non-nuclear family members of working resident aliens to come here and start sucking up services they don't pay for. I don't see expanding debt, expanding bureaucracy, or more statist voters as helpful to the cause of liberty.

[Brian4Liberty]

I agree that Mercantalism, that is, state ownership, protectionism, subsidies etc, sparked a popular movement in support of Liberal Economics. It had nothing to do with immigration, so I don't see the correlation.

I don't see immigration controls as contradictory to libertarian principles. I don't think committing national suicide is a libertarian principle, I think it is an anarchist principle. I don't think importing more statist, economically leftist and generally socially conservative third world immigrants is going to help the liberty movement politically. Driving wages down and Americans out of work to grow the welfare rolls just expands the welfare state. The welfare state is also expanded through chain migration which allows non-nuclear family members of working resident aliens to come here and start sucking up services they don't pay for. I don't see expanding debt, expanding bureaucracy, or more statist voters as helpful to the cause of liberty.

Agreed. :)

[Zippyjuan]

Immigration seems to present a paradox for libertarians. People should have freedom of movement and be able to work for whatever salary they are willing to accept. Companies should be able to hire whomever they want (preferably those willing to do the job for the least amount). Yet enforcing borders means restricting both travel and free trade (between countries). It means creating bigger government entities to write and enforce immigration laws. We don't want any sort of national ID and object to even being asked to provide a state ID sometimes yet want the same government to go around and check everybody's IDs to be sure that all people "belong here". Employers are told to become elements of the Government by being asked to verify the immigration status of anybody they seek to hire (this adds costs to the business). We want the country to be the best place in the world with the best economy (who in any country doesn't want that) and yet the better the economy is, the more people will want to come here too- both legally and illegally. The vast majority of immigrants coming here are looking for economic gains- ie better jobs.

The numbers of immigration did not decline with increased border and employer enforcement. It did decline when the jobs started to disappear and when the economy picks up, immigrants will again surge once again. We spend some five times as much on border enforcement as we did five or ten years ago. Records are being deported (reportedly at the maximum that the system can process). Are they "stealing jobs"? As I pointed out, you can give every job currently given to an illegal to somebody on the unemployment rolls and still not clear the list. Is the problem crimes? Cities with high percentages of aliens (both legal and illegal) have lower crime rates than comparable cities.

Am I for open borders? No. Am I for giving illegal immigrants benefits like welfare and college tuition? No. What I am agaist is using them as scapegoats for our own problems. They are not the cause.

[axiomata]

Immigration seems to present a paradox for libertarians. People should have freedom of movement and be able to work for whatever salary they are willing to accept. Companies should be able to hire whomever they want (preferably those willing to do the job for the least amount). Yet enforcing borders means restricting both travel and free trade (between countries). It means creating bigger government entities to write and enforce immigration laws. We don't want any sort of national ID and object to even being asked to provide a state ID sometimes yet want the same government to go around and check everybody's IDs to be sure that all people "belong here". Employers are told to become elements of the Government by being asked to verify the immigration status of anybody they seek to hire (this adds costs to the business). We want the country to be the best place in the world with the best economy (who in any country doesn't want that) and yet the better the economy is, the more people will want to come here too- both legally and illegally. The vast majority of immigrants coming here are looking for economic gains- ie better jobs.

The numbers of immigration did not decline with increased border and employer enforcement. It did decline when the jobs started to disappear and when the economy picks up, immigrants will again surge once again. We spend some five times as much on border enforcement as we did five or ten years ago. Records are being deported (reportedly at the maximum that the system can process). Are they "stealing jobs"? As I pointed out, you can give every job currently given to an illegal to somebody on the unemployment rolls and still not clear the list. Is the problem crimes? Cities with high percentages of aliens (both legal and illegal) have lower crime rates than comparable cities.

Am I for open borders? No. Am I for giving illegal immigrants benefits like welfare and college tuition? No. What I am agaist is using them as scapegoats for our own problems. They are not the cause.
Judge Napolitano agrees.

YouTube - Freedom Watch Part 4 - The Judge Is Always Unleashed 12/9/2010 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Spc3FquXpPk&t=4m35s)

Skip to 4m35s

[tremendoustie]

Am I for open borders? No. Am I for giving illegal immigrants benefits like welfare and college tuition? No.

I'd say yes and no, rather than no and no.

I wish all those angry about illegal immigrants freeloading would work to end the freeloading, rather than go after hardworking immigrants.

[tremendoustie]

I have a friend that closed his roofing business where he hired 12 legal roofers (Americans). He paid them 20 bucks an hour to roof for him. Well he told me that there were a bunch of roofers that started hiring illegals and they paid them such a low wage he could not win any bids as they underbid him and he could not compete. So he ended up closing his business and his 12 employees no longer had a job.

The way I see it they lower wages for legal Americans and take away their jobs.

It's called competition. Work for cheaper or work differently. 20 an hour is vastly overpriced for roofers imo.

Using government to block competitors is not moral.

[dannno]

I have a friend that closed his roofing business where he hired 12 legal roofers (Americans). He paid them 20 bucks an hour to roof for him. Well he told me that there were a bunch of roofers that started hiring illegals and they paid them such a low wage he could not win any bids as they underbid him and he could not compete. So he ended up closing his business and his 12 employees no longer had a job.

The way I see it they lower wages for legal Americans and take away their jobs.

This is a taxation issue, not an immigration issue.

How many dollars per hour were the legal roofers getting after taxes? Probably about the same as the illegal immigrants were making sans income tax. The legal roofers may have been paid SLIGHTLY more after taxes as they probably had better skills. The jobs he was bidding on probably would have taken into consideration his greater quality of work and would have bid on his jobs if his workers weren't getting taxed so heavily.

[tremendoustie]

Why does America need more immigrants?


America is not one single entity. If a business wants to hire someone from another country, that's their business.



Do you just believe in total anarchy and open borders?


I believe in consistently enforcing rules against harming other persons or their property. Immigrating without permission from a bureaucrat doesn't fit that description.



Surely, you recognize that America is in a recession. And as such, we don't need an influx of third world labor to depreciate wages


That's bad economics. It would also lower the price of the goods you'd purchase with those wages.



and suck up public services they don't pay for


So lets stop socializing public services.

And many immigrants do pay taxes.



and to drive more Americans to the welfare rolls.


Again, bad economics. It's government that's killing the economy.



We cannot afford more unemployment and more public debt.


Then tell the government to stop paying people to not work.



Without even addressing the cultural, social and political consequences of mass immigration,


Like what?



the economic consequences alone should be able to dissuade any reasonable person from support uncontrolled third world immigration

The only problem with poor immigrants comes if they rely on the public dole. If someone wants to work hard and support themselves, I've got no problem with it.

[tremendoustie]

This is a taxation issue, not an immigration issue.

How many dollars per hour were the legal roofers getting after taxes? Probably about the same as the illegal immigrants were making sans income tax. The legal roofers may have been paid SLIGHTLY more after taxes as they probably had better skills. The jobs he was bidding on probably would have taken into consideration his greater quality of work and would have bid on his jobs if his workers weren't getting taxed so heavily.

That's also true.

[tremendoustie]

So your theory is that the number of jobs never stagnates or decreases?

Of course it does -- primarily due to government .

But it's still not a fixed number. If 100 new people show up to open a factory, the goods they produce add to the total wealth of the country. If they consume less than they produce, they make everyone else more wealthy. Even if they consume equal value to what they produce, they increase total wealth, because they are making mutually beneficial trades. They have INCREASED the size of the pie -- not taken from anyone else's piece.

Scarcity means there is never a point where people have all they want, and do not want anything more. Lower the price enough, and there will be buyers.

A better way to think of an economy is in terms of wealth created -- not number of jobs. The more wealth we create, the wealthier we are.

[heavenlyboy34]

Tremendoustie-I agree with most of your points. When Adolfo was talking about "Without even addressing the cultural, social and political consequences of mass immigration" He is referring to situations similar to what happens in certain areas here in AZ. Imagine a large portion of any foreign country suddenly being transplanted in a totally different place. There are culture clashes because of language barriers, customs, and traditions. For example, one example of the mass exodus of mezzo- and south-americans is a resurgence of MDRTB (multi-drug resistant Tuberculosis) in recent years. It gets pretty complicated, but I think you get the idea. The solution, IMHO, is absolute ownership of property. This gives property owners at the border incentive and frees up resources to defend against intruders and allow in guests and seasonal labor.

[tremendoustie]

Tremendoustie-I agree with most of your points. When Adolfo was talking about "Without even addressing the cultural, social and political consequences of mass immigration" He is referring to situations similar to what happens in certain areas here in AZ. Imagine a large portion of any foreign country suddenly being transplanted in a totally different place. There are culture clashes because of language barriers, customs, and traditions. For example, one example of the mass exodus of mezzo- and south-americans is a resurgence of MDRTB (multi-drug resistant Tuberculosis) in recent years. It gets pretty complicated, but I think you get the idea. The solution, IMHO, is absolute ownership of property. This gives property owners at the border incentive and frees up resources to defend against intruders and allow in guests and seasonal labor.

Fair enough.

And I think in some circumstances, if negligent, a person could be held liable for spreading disease.

[libertarian4321]

I don't have a problem with immigrants, ESPECIALLY those with education and skills- as long as there are no government freebies.

Every person with a degree in medicine, engineering, science, nursing, etc that wants to move the USA they should be waved in at full speed. I say this as an engineer who, according to some here, should feel "threatened" by these immigrants.

Every time we allow a bright, well educated immigrant to live here, we make America stronger.

Just to make it fair, for every Indian or Chinese engineer we get, we'll send them one uneducated unemployed American roofer. Let's dilute their gene pool and strengthen ours.

Er, just kidding...I think.

[Brian4Liberty]

Judge Napolitano agrees.

YouTube - Freedom Watch Part 4 - The Judge Is Always Unleashed 12/9/2010 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Spc3FquXpPk&t=4m35s)


The beginning of that is a great segment is illustrate the problem with economists. The first example is from Seinfeld where Elaine is given cash and is upset. The Judge and his guest go on about how cash really is the best gift. They entirely miss the point! The real world is not a calculation! There are other factors. Every person in the world does not operate like a computer that has all information and calculates the best monetary solution. Elaine doesn't want cash! The best part of Austrian economics is the understanding that the entire system is far too complex to fully understand. The worst part is that Austrians are more than willing to give you a very simple answer to any question that arises. Pure dogma.

As for the labor pool, supply and demand does apply, yet at the same time humans are not widgets! They can not be stored in a warehouse when they are not needed. Flood the market with labor, and you end up with people suffering. Those people will react. They will form labor Unions. They will vote for socialism and welfare. They will demand free education and extensions to unemployment "insurance". They will riot. They may even revolt. Excess labor makes each individual worth less. Liberty is often derived from the value of the individual. Less value results in less Liberty.

There are balances. Dogmatically defending the Liberty for anyone to immigrate anywhere at any time may result in reducing overall Liberty for everyone when there is excess labor at any given time and place. And if that time is while you are alive, and that place is where you live, you may screw yourself out of a lot more Liberty than you gained by defending perpetually open immigration above all else.


An interview with Ron Paul:



What is your view on legal immigration?

I think it depends on our economy. If we have a healthy economy, I think we could be very generous on work programs.
...
Is the economy healthy enough right now?

No. I don’t think so.
...

http://www.vdare.com/pb/070912_paul.htm