illegal immigration and the US workforce

[HomerThompson]

hello Mr. Thompson,

so, a wash in the end? like, no change for better or for worse?

i'm just curious what you think. i haven't really formed an opinion on the matter.

- IGIT

I think it would end up being a wash. Obviously, there are a multitude of factors involved, the most important being the motivation of the US population to actually achieve a change in our current corporate oligarchical structure. That's a mighty spicy taco though.

 

[IGIT]

When I used to work for a painting contractor he often times let a high skilled/high pay worker go and replaced him with 2 or 3 illegals for the same price since he didn't have to pay them even minimum wage.

hi DynamicLoosener,

so, a plus for ownership, and quite possibly, a plus for the consumer (since higher wages would probably be coupled by higher fees for the consumer).

does that sound about right?

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

Can't see too many young entitled millennials( like the types from the Berkeley marches) rushing to take those fruit picking and dish washing jobs.

hello and well met Misfit23,

i'm unclear what the Berkley marches have to do with the OP, but i figure a Berkley grad isn't going to be picking fruit or washing dishes anyway (is it just millennials who feel entitled? weren't GenX folks entitled when they were young? and the baby boomers?).

the folks who would benefit would be lower wager workers who might be induced to take these jobs because the wages would rise.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

hi Rod1,

The thing is that the US economy is already near max capacity, so if it was to happen, then the Fed would need to increase the interest rate by quite a big margin in order to slow down the economy to accomodate for the shortage of labor.

but a rate hike, in an of itself, would not necessarily be a "bad thing", right?

So GDP would certainly shrink a bit since there would be less people working, as to wages increasing that would probably happen in a few sectors, but that would simply mean that a lot of business will go under as opposed to simply paying higher wages.

why wouldn't fees just increase for the consumer, offsetting a rise in wages?

As to remittances, you may have a point when it comes to local economy, but at a national level its irrelevant.

why would it be irrelevant? i'm not challenging you, and i don't have a fistful of data i'm waiting to spring on you...i'm honestly curious.

if something is beneficial to the local economy, wouldn't it also be tangentially beneficial to the national economy as a whole?

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

You are right to the false dichotomy when it comes to liberalism and flooding the labor markets with cheap labor, thats why until recently Democrats were the anti-immigration party and Republicans were the pro-immigration one.

ahoy Rod1,

that's a good point to bring up.

- IGIT

 

[Rod1]

hi Rod1,

but a rate hike, in an of itself, would not necessarily be a "bad thing", right?

why wouldn't fees just increase for the consumer, offsetting a rise in wages?

why would it be irrelevant? i'm not challenging you, and i don't have a fistful of data i'm waiting to spring on you...i'm honestly curious.

if something is beneficial to the local economy, wouldn't it also be tangentially beneficial to the national economy as a whole?

- IGIT

1.- I would assume that it would lead to a recession when coupled with a huge chunk of the labor force leaving the workforce. I think @Jack V Savage would provide a better picture.

2.- Most definitively, kicking illegals out would generate a hike on prices in a lot of consumer goods, except in real estate.

3.- Because remittances are not physical things being extracted, remittances are untangential IOUs that exist only in the abstract mind, when jose sends remitttances to his family in latin america, he isnt sending actual wealth, he is actually sending paper money, paper money that would be ultimately useless if not spent on American goods and services.

4.- Not really, for example oil prices, America is one of the largest producers of oil, but its also a net importer. So high oil prices are bad for the economy, but really good for oil producing regions of the US.

So bad for the national economy but good for the local economy.

 

[nostradumbass]

'evening nortradumbass,



yes.

so then, first of all the lower wage US workers would see a boon in their fortunes.

secondly, prices would rise (but not without end, they'd just go up). a negative for the consumer and, i figure, for our export market.



i read an article while musing about my OP that stated that if US employers are actually forced to hire US workers, it'll only speed the progression towards automation.

so in the end, what do you think?

a net gain or a net loss overall?

- IGIT

That depends on who you ask. I don't think GDP would move too drastically in either direction, but different people would affected differently. I suspect workers on the lower end would benefit the most, since their pay would like improve faster than costs would increase. Small businesses already pay pretty decently, since they're usually too small to even have fluff positions that they could do without, so I doubt they'd be affected too much.

The biggest exceptions would be in the restaurant industry and landscaping/construction. The profit margin is already not great for those businesses, so they would have the hardest time adjusting. It's possible that dishwashers, bus boys, lawn care jobs wouldn't see a huge raise in wages, and would probably just be for teenagers looking for pocket money and a little early work experience.

It might speed up automation, but if you're an American low wage worker, it probably doesn't make much difference to you if you lost your job to a robot or an illegal immigrant, and if they do move towards automation, it would definitely be a disaster to have built up the underclass so much. New jobs pop up with industry innovations, but it's not an infinite number. When the car was invented, guys making horse shoes were SOL, but then auto workers, mechanics, car part manufacturing positions came and replaced them.

Overall, it would likely be a positive, and immigrants can come here when more people are needed.

 

[colby25]

hello everyone,

i was following the election in France, whilst also thinking about the immigration/H1B/H2B situation here in the states, and i had a question;

if the Trump administration were to completely staunch the flow of illegals to this nation, continue its unleashing of ICE officials from sea to shining sea, while also restricting H1B/H2B visas, would the result be more employed Americans along with higher wages across the board for everyone in those respective fields?

and, if the answer is "yes" to the above, wouldn't that be a wonderful boon to the United States?

my second question would be this;

i figure there would be a cost offset for everything too, as American ITs filled those jobs in the tech industry and earned more....and as Americans replaced Mexican and Central American labor in the kitchens of various restaurants and earned more....and this trend would continue in the construction and hospitality industry, along with the agribusiness.

meaning, either there would be less profits for ownership or the cost for everything would rise for the general public.

so would the end result be a net positive for things like GDP and government spending (since presumably there would be less public assistance as wages went up) or would it be a net negative?

- IGIT

From my experience I'd be more concerned with illegals not working but living off us benefits. That's what's killing us.

H1B issue is good because they'll hire within the us first. I doubt many companies will pay that much more extra salary wise just so they can give it to someone foreign.

I see a net gain all around... Just my opinion tho

 

[Jack V Savage]

1.- I would assume that it would lead to a recession when coupled with a huge chunk of the labor force leaving the workforce. I think @Jack V Savage would provide a better picture.

2.- Most definitively, kicking illegals out would generate a hike on prices in a lot of consumer goods, except in real estate.

3.- Because remittances are not physical things being extracted, remittances are untangential IOUs that exist only in the abstract mind, when jose sends remitttances to his family in latin america, he isnt sending actual wealth, he is actually sending paper money, paper money that would be ultimately useless if not spent on American goods and services.

4.- Not really, for example oil prices, America is one of the largest producers of oil, but its also a net importer. So high oil prices are bad for the economy, but really good for oil producing regions of the US.

So bad for the national economy but good for the local economy.

I'm not really clear on what's being asked for.

More generally in this thread, people (not you, I don't think) seem to be using a really weird model and seem to be unaware that net unauthorized immigration (particularly from Mexico) has been falling for a long time now. A top-line reduction could lead to lower outflows and a similar trend in the bottom line.

New workers coming in doesn't "flood the market" and reduce prices necessarily because spending and economic activity is also increased (that is, more workers lead to more jobs). If you want to know how it balances out, you have to look at the data. Results from studies show a range from a small negative effect to a moderate positive effect on employment for the native population, with an average of a small positive effect. People are trying to answer the question logically rather than empirically (which is impossible) AND are getting the logic wrong.

And remittances are an immaterial issue in America, particularly the subset from unauthorized immigrants. Total out-of-country remittances are around $50B a year, or 0.3% of GDP, and most of that is from legal residents.

 

[Rational Poster]

>leftists say they want higher wages for the working class
>want to flood the market with cheap labor

>leftists say they want to let in mexicans out of kindness
>aware that these people are paid slave wages for terrible work
>use their sub-minimum wage as an argument on why its good for them to be here

ayyy lmao

>leftist wants a livable wage for everyone
>american businesses get around this by hiring slave labor
>righties want to punish the slaves but not the employers

 

[lifelessheap]

It would only be a benefit if we brought unions back, or if there was a serious worker's party in this country. Otherwise, costs for goods would go up or there would be more tax breaks for corporations. 'Merica.

Guess who hated illegal aliens? Cesar Chavez. Why? Because they destroyed the wages for legal farm workers and wrecked his union work.

Now, I would gladly pay more for my lettuce if it meant it was picked legally by a citizen. I would also enjoy paying a lower tax rate because illegals wouldn't be soaking in hundreds of billions of tax payer funds per year and my auto insurance would be lower because it has doubled over the three years because of illegal drivers.

And think of the money saved by not having our prisons filled with illegals.

 

[helltoupee]

From my experience I'd be more concerned with illegals not working but living off us benefits. That's what's killing us.

Would you mind explaining this statement?

Illegals aren't eligible for benefits/welfare/etc.

Furthermore, most illegals pay taxes.

"Immigrants illegally in the U.S. collectively contribute nearly $12 billion each year to state and local tax coffers...

The study from the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy found that immigrants in the U.S. without legal permission kick in their billions in the form of income, property, sales or excise taxes."

 

[Seano]

I'm against illegal immigration but OK with visas.

Illegal immigration simply gives employers the opportunity to pay shit wages to people who have no voice. ITs not a good thing, no matter how the left wants to spin it.

 

[IGIT]

hello on this rainy monday, Rod1,

1.- I would assume that it would lead to a recession when coupled with a huge chunk of the labor force leaving the workforce. I think @Jack V Savage would provide a better picture.

i've read that there are various sectors of the US populous that would benefit if rates were goosed up a bit, but i'm unclear of the result if such activity was coupled with a forced exodus of undocumented workers.

2.- Most definitively, kicking illegals out would generate a hike on prices in a lot of consumer goods, except in real estate.

thats what i figured...either that, or ownership would simply absorb a cut in profits in the hopes of remaining competitive. would, however, this hypothetical rise in costs be counterbalanced (at the very least) by a rise in wages?

3.- Because remittances are not physical things being extracted, remittances are untangential IOUs that exist only in the abstract mind, when jose sends remitttances to his family in latin america, he isnt sending actual wealth, he is actually sending paper money, paper money that would be ultimately useless if not spent on American goods and services.

aye

4.- Not really, for example oil prices, America is one of the largest producers of oil, but its also a net importer. So high oil prices are bad for the economy, but really good for oil producing regions of the US.

So bad for the national economy but good for the local economy.

but is this an accurate analogy to draw? we're not talking about a phenomenon where local economies are being stimulated at the cost of the national economy. we're talking about the local economy benefiting, full stop.

right?

- IGIT[/quote]

 

[IGIT]

That depends on who you ask. I don't think GDP would move too drastically in either direction, but different people would affected differently. I suspect workers on the lower end would benefit the most, since their pay would like improve faster than costs would increase. Small businesses already pay pretty decently, since they're usually too small to even have fluff positions that they could do without, so I doubt they'd be affected too much.

The biggest exceptions would be in the restaurant industry and landscaping/construction. The profit margin is already not great for those businesses, so they would have the hardest time adjusting. It's possible that dishwashers, bus boys, lawn care jobs wouldn't see a huge raise in wages, and would probably just be for teenagers looking for pocket money and a little early work experience.

It might speed up automation, but if you're an American low wage worker, it probably doesn't make much difference to you if you lost your job to a robot or an illegal immigrant, and if they do move towards automation, it would definitely be a disaster to have built up the underclass so much. New jobs pop up with industry innovations, but it's not an infinite number. When the car was invented, guys making horse shoes were SOL, but then auto workers, mechanics, car part manufacturing positions came and replaced them.

Overall, it would likely be a positive, and immigrants can come here when more people are needed.

hello nostradumbass,

so...a positive then. maybe.

ok.

thanks for responding.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

From my experience I'd be more concerned with illegals not working but living off us benefits. That's what's killing us.

H1B issue is good because they'll hire within the us first. I doubt many companies will pay that much more extra salary wise just so they can give it to someone foreign.

I see a net gain all around... Just my opinion tho

hello colby25,

i guess in some ways undocumented immigrants live off some benefits...but i've never been sure of that.

they go to our public schools, but then again they probably pay property taxes (since they have to live somewhere, whether they own or rent)...they pay sales tax, for sure...and yet there are many benefits that they can never benefit from, but pay into.

the H1B issue is still, at the moment, unresolved, though there is a proposal working through congress that would raise the minimum threshold to a 100k per year salary, i think.

what about H2B visas?

is the expertise of seasonal workers so specialized that folks like our POTUS really need to hire folks from Mexico and Central America?

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

I'm not really clear on what's being asked for.

hello JVS,

i'm really just trying to understand something that i've been unable to find conclusive writing on in terms that i can grasp.

i know a bit about economics...i know a bit about the immigration debate...but they are not my areas of expertise.

back to your response, are you saying that if Mr. Trump was able to completely staunch the flow of undocumented immigrants to this country, along with somehow expelling the current ones that reside here, working class wages would see a net positive increase?

- IGIT

 

[helltoupee]

hello colby25,

i guess in some ways undocumented immigrants live off some benefits...but i've never been sure of that.

they go to us public schools, but then again they probably pay property taxes (since they have to live somewhere, whether they own or rent)...they pay sales tax, for sure...and yet there are many benefits that they can never benefit from, but pay into.

the H1B issue is still, at the moment, unresolved, though there is a proposal working through congress that would raise the minimum threshold to a 100k per year salary, i think.

what about H2B visas?

is the expertise of seasonal workers so specialized that folks like our POTUS really need to hire folks from Mexico and Central America?

- IGIT

He doesn't know what he's talking about. You can't get welfare benefits/etc if you are illegal.

Second, as I mentioned, but didn't include in my post, was that many illegals pay taxes but never file a tax return, meaning their overpayments (refunds) just end up in government coffers.

 

[IGIT]

I'm against illegal immigration but OK with visas.

Illegal immigration simply gives employers the opportunity to pay shit wages to people who have no voice. ITs not a good thing, no matter how the left wants to spin it.

heya Seano,

this thread isn't really a left vs right thing, and as Rod1 has pointed out, the right has historically been okie dokie with illegal immigration for the very reasons you cited in your post.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

hello helltoupee,

He doesn't know what he's talking about. You can't get welfare benefits/etc if you are illegal.

yep. i noted that in my response to him.

Second, as I mentioned, but didn't include in my post, was that many illegals pay taxes but never file a tax return, meaning their overpayments (refunds) just end up in government coffers.

yep! i also noted this in my response to him.

i'm still waiting for Colby to reply.

- IGIT