illegal immigration and the US workforce

[ManCityFC9]

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

Good question IGIT

http://www.fairus.org/publications/...llegal-immigration-on-united-states-taxpayers

This link states a NET loss of $80-$113Billion a year due to illegal immigration but a lot of the data is predicted/estimated and not hardline empirical data.

I'd prefer to enforce legal immigration
- I'd like to remove as much of the incentive for illegal immigration
--fine those that hire illegal immigrants
--fine visa holders with expired documents(if they can be found)
--seize assets of relatives or at least threaten to(sounds a bit harsh and I am being a biy facetious)

The reason I'd prefer to enforce law and remove illegals
1. To remove them as political puppets and talking points for either political party
(let's face it, neither party trully empathize with illegals and their circumstances; they are being used for political gain and getting the empathy of the voting public)

2. The crime associated with illegals and their next generation
-without a proper vote to get the local govt to improve their neighborhoods, a perpetuity of poverty and crime occurs.
-jails, federal sentences, etc.

3. The intrinsic healthcare costs are something to consider and are a bit of a burden.
-uninsured but get ER service

4. US Education reform and those construction, welding,(both not minimum wage by the way) and low skilled labor jobs can help the youth and other US citizens make a bit of money.
-only 4% of illegals do labor in agriculture(fruit picking)... it's not just us that prefer to steer clear of that job.

5. Illegals send their children to public school
Costs quite a bit

I'd like to see immigration law enforced

Maybe the faster we get past this political topic, the better

 

[IGIT]

Here's what would happen. In the short run, americans would make more money.

In the long run, some other country would create a haven for those highly skilled people and gradually transform into the innovation capitla of the world. This would harm U.S. businesses and over time Americans would make less money.

We don't use H1B's on community college graduates. We use them on people with highly desirable skills. And those people keep us ahead of other nations while depriving their home nations of their specific talents. Win-Win. There is no reason to give that up.

hi and thanks for responding, Pan,

Jack has made the case that expelling and blocking illegal immigrants from entering the counter will have a definite negative affect on the economy....you're stating that suspending H1B visas would have a deleterious affects on our tech industry.

a few folks have said that it'll be wash in the end, and a few folks have said the aftereffects of Mr. Trump's stated policy will be positive.

i'm reading up on this a bit more at the moment.

i'm really looking at this from a non-partisan standpoint. i'm just interested in what would lead to the best outcome for the country as a whole - and i'm still pretty undecided.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

What do you mean "held responsible"? What punishment are you suggesting? Cutting off the supply of low wage labor does force them to hire legal workers and pay them.

hello nostradumbass,

intuitively, that would seem to be the case, wouldn't it?

i mean, let's take the farmworkers in Idaho. almost half of them are undocumented workers.

without all the illegal immigrants that Idaho makes such prodigious use of, wouldn't they be forced to pay higher and higher wages, until Americans would be lured into those jobs?

what other choice would agribusiness in Idaho have? let their fields lie fallow?

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

Highly skilled immigrants are vital for American tech companies to not only stay in business, but to continue to innovate and be competitive on the global scale. I work for a semi-conductor design and manufacturing company and we heavily rely on immigrants for process and product development engineers. The fact is there are simply not enough qualified or educated Americans, particularly in semiconductor physics, electrical theory, etc etc. Its the same for a great many tech and manufacturing companies. They NEED highly skilled immigrants because there simply aren't enough citizens that are highly trained/educated in STEM fields to fill the labor demand.

hi StrikerKing and well met,

i haven't seen anyone answer or counter your post.

maybe H1B workers are indeed just needed in this country, then.

the Trump administration has made noises about taking a very, very hardline against H1B visas.

Beginning Monday, the Department of Homeland Security promised greater scrutiny of the H-1B program, which began accepting applications for a lottery that will award visas in 2018. The government’s immigration enforcers plan to heighten their “site visits,” they said, to “determine whether H-1B dependent employers are evading their obligation to make a good faith effort to recruit U.S. workers.”

The Justice Department, meanwhile, issued its own stern warning Monday. “The Justice Department will not tolerate employers misusing the H-1B visa process to discriminate against U.S. workers,” said Tom Wheeler, the acting assistant attorney general at the DOJ’s civil rights division.
https://www.recode.net/2017/4/3/151...foreign-immigration-h1b-tech-hiring-crackdown

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

Looking forward to a polite greeting from @IGIT

hello nac386,

its very nice to meet you, thank you for visiting this thread.

sincerely,

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

It is not even a new trick. It has been perpetrated over and over. For example, remember in the 80's when we had the war on drugs? Crack was destroying the ghetto, causing everyone to be broke and unemployed, right?

Wrong. They were broke and unemployed already. But that is complicated, so instead of actually doing something to help the economy, the politicians scapegoated crack as the cause and just sent more police in to arrest people. That way it looks like they are doing something to help the community on the evening news, while actually doing nothing at all to fix the root of the problem.

hi nac386,

a bit off topic, but i think its funny (and sort of depressing) to see the empathetic response from DC on opioid abuse, which affects so many white collar and middle class americans.

so different from their orgy of incarceration on folks addicted to crack a few decades ago.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

hello there ManCityFC9,

if its alright, i'd like to comment on a few of your bullet points;

http://www.fairus.org/publications/...llegal-immigration-on-united-states-taxpayers

This link states a NET loss of $80-$113Billion a year due to illegal immigration but a lot of the data is predicted/estimated and not hardline empirical data.

but since illegal immigrants are responsible for $381.5 billion to $623.2 billion in private sector output, isn't their presence here in the US still a tremendous net gain?

1. To remove them as political puppets and talking points for either political party
(let's face it, neither party trully empathize with illegals and their circumstances; they are being used for political gain and getting the empathy of the voting public)

the Dream Act was a pretty empathetic piece of legislation, wasn't it?

2. The crime associated with illegals and their next generation
-without a proper vote to get the local govt to improve their neighborhoods, a perpetuity of poverty and crime occurs.
-jails, federal sentences, etc.

everything i've read about crime and illegal immigrants is that they're less likely to commit crime than American citizens, since the downsides for getting caught are possible deportation.

granted, the fact that they're even here is a crime.

4. US Education reform and those construction, welding,(both not minimum wage by the way) and low skilled labor jobs can help the youth and other US citizens make a bit of money.
-only 4% of illegals do labor in agriculture(fruit picking)... it's not just us that prefer to steer clear of that job.

the preponderance of illegal immigrants that work in agriculture vary from state to state...some states seem highly reliant on them, such as Georgia, Florida and Idaho.

5. Illegals send their children to public school
Costs quite a bit

but illegal immigrants pay for public schooling. whether they do so directly through homes they own, or indirectly on domiciles they rent - they pay property taxes.

Maybe the faster we get past this political topic, the better

i agree with you here.

- IGIT

 

[uppercutbus]

All these people talking about highly skilled, like that's the be-all end-all. . . I saw this discussion on reddit.

1 - companies low ball a wage that native skilled won't bite. No one applies and the company then blames a shortage of highly skilled people. So they import Pakistanis at half the wage. All outsourcing is about the bottom line.

The first thing they teach you about business is that biggest cost to a business is salaries, thus workers get cut and/or outsourced.

Another benefit is you can treat your employees like crap, pay them next to nothing, give them no benefits, and deny them any protections an American worker expects (overtime? What's that?) etc.

The H1-B system keeps Indians and Pakistanis perpetually fearful of their employer with no ability to move between employers or get proper benefits and pay. It suits the company fine, it's not good for Americans, because that company culture becomes normalized over time as the company gets used to it and shit treatment passes over onto American workers.

2 - outsourcing IT is absolute garbage.

Their final work is usually sloppy and requires rework which makes the whole outsourcing more expensive than having a FTE complete it inhouse.

Whatever you save on salary is countered on other things such as communication times, retesting and all that.

3 - outsourcing IT administration, like server support, VMs hardware, desktop, phone, tablet, smartphone, whatever device support, is also garbage. Replacing a person with a phone # or email address outside of the context of the company brings cultural backlash from a company culture prospective (no it's not racist). If you're an American business, you employ Americans of all races, religions, ethic backgrounds and creeds... but they live and work in America. People don't want to call Dell and get India where accent and difficulty in understanding is mutual. The customer service is shit and that reflects on the companies.

Also none of this is conjecture. Employees sue American company who layed them off for H1-Bs/outsourcing.

The lawsuit charges that the employees were fired because the companies sought to employ people "whose national origin, race and/or ethnicity was exclusively Indian," and didn't want to employ Americans or green-card holders.

Tons of H1-B abuse, from overlooking qualified citizen labor for less qualified but cheaper H1-B equivalents to companies hiring H1-Bs and treating them like crap, paying them crap and never giving them raises because they know the H1-B people can't easily leave. It's gotten worse since the article (2011) no doubt.

As for Illegals:

 

[colby25]

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."

You're going to believe what you want but trust me it's not the jobs illegals are here for anymore it's the benefits... I shouldn't say all but there's a lot.

What if I told you that drug dealers aren't allowed to slang drugs on the street to argue against illegal drug use. You would laugh at me. This is essentially your argument here.

It's sounds rediculous how an illegal could get benefits but these benefits- welfare, ebt, low income housing is often state provided.

 

[colby25]

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

I'm talking welfare, ebt cards the whole 9 yards... Not just public education which they certainly are taking advantage as well but hey who can blame them for getting an education.

Also, I'm all about the threshold being put up to a 100k. Seasonal workers might be a tad different and I can see how a person might be forced to hire outside the country.

 

[xcvbn]

Shut down companies caught knowingly hiring illegals. That'll deter some of the demand, maybe even a large portion if the states and feds would actually enforce immigration laws on businesses, not just illegals.

To me this issue is as clear cut as law enforcement going after drug users instead of the major suppliers.

 

[ManCityFC9]

hello there ManCityFC9,

if its alright, i'd like to comment on a few of your bullet points;



but since illegal immigrants are responsible for $381.5 billion to $623.2 billion in private sector output, isn't there presence here in the US still a tremendous net gain?



the Dream Act was a pretty empathetic piece of legislation, wasn't it?



everything i've read about crime and illegal immigrants is that they're less likely to commit crime than American citizens, since the downsides for getting caught are possible deportation.

granted, the fact that they're even here is a crime.



the preponderance of illegal immigrants that work in agriculture vary from state to state...some states seem highly reliant on them, such as Georgia, Florida and Idaho.



but illegal immigrants pay for public schooling. whether they do so directly through homes they own, or indirectly on domiciles they rent - they pay property taxes.



i agree with you here.

- IGIT

Good morning IGIT,

1. $381.5-$623.2B is quite a decent portion of output.
-My only rebuttle would be that I am not sure how much of that output could not be replaced by US Citizens/legal workers taking those jobs(younger and less educated can substitute some portion)
-maybe 70%+ of that output in the event the undocumented immigrants were removed.

2.The DREAM Act seems empathethetic;
I just believe that the political parties that be utilize this piece of legislation with a definite agenda for gaining the latin american and minority vote.
-I wont go into any conspiracies about the globalist agenda and growing the welfare state and gov't, but there was definitely a motive to create the DREAM act rather than push through and negotiate education reform like congress should.

3. As far as crime;
it could be a case of sources. I can't say mine are better than yours, who really knows.
But I do like sources that utilize Pew research stats:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/10155/9-things-you-need-know-about-illegal-immigration-aaron-bandler#
-This site states that illegals are more likely to commit crimes(but your sources may say something different
-Point 5 of this site does denotes that
"a disproportionate amount of illegals are in state prisons" and uses pew facts
-"illegal immigrants accounted for nearly 75% of federal drug sentences in 2014"
--I have heard this stat from multiple sources.

4. Agriculture Occupations held by undocumented immigrants;
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ented-immigrants-work/?utm_term=.fcd368eb3f16
-The post denotes in a chart that farming/agriculture is a very small percentage of the occupations held by illegals (4% nationally); though it varies from state to state, this is still a relatively small concern in terms of industry impacts.

5. Illegal immigrants do pay taxes and do not receive refunds back, but the amount of taxes they pay compared to a household of legal workers/citizens is less;
Also, the costs of education and reduced and free lunches for these children are factored and are still quite an expense.
- but an argument could be made here, I am off to work and could engage a bit more in this convo, especially with the net costs of education and how that correlates to what undocumented immigrants pay in taxes
(also note* what they pay is still a small amount due to them not being in a high income bracket)

cheers buddy, chat with you soon.

 

[panamaican]

hi and thanks for responding, Pan,

Jack has made the case that expelling and blocking illegal immigrants from entering the counter will have a definite negative affect on the economy....you're stating that suspending H1B visas would have a deleterious affects on our tech industry.

a few folks have said that it'll be wash in the end, and a few folks have said the aftereffects of Mr. Trump's stated policy will be positive.

i'm reading up on this a bit more at the moment.

i'm really looking at this from a non-partisan standpoint. i'm just interested in what would lead to the best outcome for the country as a whole - and i'm still pretty undecided.

- IGIT

Not just our tech industry. Our medical industry. Our construction industry. Basically every industry in the U.S. imports bright minds - even our athletics industry.

 

[Jack V Savage]

hi and thanks for responding, Pan,

Jack has made the case that expelling and blocking illegal immigrants from entering the counter will have a definite negative affect on the economy.

That's not what I said.

"I think the most likely effect on working-class wages would be slightly negative.

What I was saying was that there are two main things to consider--increased value and thus demand for labor and increased supply of labor. So you can't really know the bottom-line effect just by thinking about it--you have to look at the evidence."

My point is that people ITT are not thinking through all the effects, and that because it logically could go either way, this is an empirical question. Then I note that the weight of the evidence suggests to me a small, positive effect on wages and employment from low-skilled immigration (including unauthorized immigration).

On the issue of student visas, high-skilled workers, high-skilled immigration, etc., I think there's a clear and pretty significant positive effect.

 

[panamaican]

That makes sense at a glance, but it turns out they aren't really hiring people through H-1B because they are just better or more qualified, it's because they are cheaper and their legal status/visa is tied to the company they work for so they can't go elsewhere. I believe something like 80% of H-1B holders are paid less than the median for their field.

I don't think anyone thinks they shouldn't exist at all, but tightening up the number of them and preventing companies from exploiting the system is something worth looking at.

I didn't say they were universally "better". I say they were highly qualified. If you have 10 Americans with Comp sci. degrees, that's great. But if you have 10 Americans plus 2 H1-B's, that's better. Now you have 12 Comp sci degrees and the rest of the world has 2 fewer. That gives us a +4 advantage in Comp sci degree holders.

And companies aren't hiring from the bottom of the class for their H1-B's. They're hiring from the upper half so we're getting people who are skilled. People tend to ignore all of the international students who don't get jobs here and go home unemployed despite wanting to stay. It's not just a free for all.

And they're paid less because there's a separate cost associated with processing their paperwork. The companies are basically making them pay for their own paperwork and compliance. And for the privilege of staying here. Which is fine. You might take less money if it meant working from home. Or a shorter commute. Or any variety of things. They're still getting the same benefit packages and it's not like the money just disappears into thin air.

 

[Jack V Savage]

A lot of politicians are working hard to scapegoat illegal immigrants now as the cause of low wages, but in reality it is often directly the result of wealthy CEOs doing everything they can to squeeze every dime out of their employees.

It is morally criminal.

Can't agree with this, though I'd like to be able to. On average, people are going to act according to incentives. CEOs or management consultants are no different. If you're ascribing the divergence between median income growth and GDP growth to CEO behavior, the question would still be why CEOs are acting differently.

And I don't think that's an accurate claim, anyway. There was just a piece on Bloomberg yesterday looking at the four standard explanations for the falling labor share (rising capital share) of the economy (opening trade to China, automation, monopoly power, and landlords grabbing a bigger piece of the pie). There are arguments for all of the explanations but also problems with them all. It also doesn't mention changes in the tax code and anti-union laws and practices, which have had an impact (even on "pre-tax" income).

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/arti...g-the-mystery-of-labor-s-falling-share-of-gdp

And the piece doesn't mention it (as it's focused on capital vs. labor), but rising inequality within labor incomes is more between firms than within them (which I think counters your theory).

 

[nac386]

Can't agree with this, though I'd like to be able to. On average, people are going to act according to incentives. CEOs or management consultants are no different. If you're ascribing the divergence between median income growth and GDP growth to CEO behavior, the question would still be why CEOs are acting differently.

And I don't think that's an accurate claim, anyway. There was just a piece on Bloomberg yesterday looking at the four standard explanations for the falling labor share (rising capital share) of the economy (opening trade to China, automation, monopoly power, and landlords grabbing a bigger piece of the pie). There are arguments for all of the explanations but also problems with them all. It also doesn't mention changes in the tax code and anti-union laws and practices, which have had an impact (even on "pre-tax" income).

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/arti...g-the-mystery-of-labor-s-falling-share-of-gdp

And the piece doesn't mention it (as it's focused on capital vs. labor), but rising inequality within labor incomes is more between firms than within them (which I think counters your theory).

There should be a 5th explanation added: CEOs like to keep as much of the money as possible.

Let's take Trump, for example. He's a billionaire who has reportedly ripped off relatively low paid workers repeatedly throughout his career. Why? Can he not afford it? Of course he can. But he makes even more money if he crushes the little guy, so that is what he does.

These people have a different mentality. They are often brutally unfeeling and emotionless when it comes to business. I do not know what industry you are in, but most of us have seen this first hand.

Hell, I'll give you another example. My father has worked for the same company for 35 years. In the early 2000s, the company was European and was bought by an American company. What did they do? They cut raises. Then recorded record profits. Then they cut his bonuses. Then they recorded more record profits. Then they took his company car. Then they recorded even more record profits.

He is the one earning them record profits. He does the work. Does he get a piece of that pie? Of course not. Everyone at the top kept getting richer, and everyone in the middle and down kept getting screwed. Maybe I'll write into Bloomberg and tell them they missed something.

 

[IGIT]

Not just our tech industry. Our medical industry. Our construction industry. Basically every industry in the U.S. imports bright minds - even our athletics industry.

hi pan,

alright.

i've gotta read up more on H1B visa holders...and i appreciate your reply, Pan. i've mostly been trying to understand the net positive/negative effects of hiring illegal immigrants.

i don't want to seem argumentative on the issue of H1B visa holders, but i'd like to ask you a question;

i can see how a tech company would benefit if they feel that the necessary expertise isn't available domestically.
the company gets a high skilled employee, and its fortunes would rise as the result.

but what about the US born IT?

his skills may not be up to par (but i would imagine he's trainable). doesn't that guy lose his job to some fellow from India?

bear with me here...if you would.

the company loses if it has to hire an American who isn't sufficiently skilled at his job, but wouldn't the US born worker gain?

presuming that the US born worker is not incapable of being trained to sharpen his expertise, couldn't US tech companies hire these "not-quite-ready-for-prime-time" players and bring'm up to speed?

- IGIT

 

[AGGAMEMNON66]

>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

AaYYyyy

 

[IGIT]

That's not what I said.

"I think the most likely effect on working-class wages would be slightly negative.

What I was saying was that there are two main things to consider--increased value and thus demand for labor and increased supply of labor. So you can't really know the bottom-line effect just by thinking about it--you have to look at the evidence."

My point is that people ITT are not thinking through all the effects, and that because it logically could go either way, this is an empirical question. Then I note that the weight of the evidence suggests to me a small, positive effect on wages and employment from low-skilled immigration (including unauthorized immigration).

On the issue of student visas, high-skilled workers, high-skilled immigration, etc., I think there's a clear and pretty significant positive effect.

hi Jack V Savage,

i apologize for misinterpreting your post, that was not my intent.

i've been reading more on the effect that illegal immigrants have on wages (and the economy as a whole), and outside of a piece i read by Art Carden in Forbes (an adjunct scholar from the Ludwing Von Mises Institute) that is very "pro-hiring-of-illegal-immigrants", i haven't found anything very definitive.

the most troubling piece i've read on the topic is one authored by David Frum (you know who he is, i'm fairly sure), in the Atlantic.

- IGIT