illegal immigration and the US workforce

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

In short, not really.

I think MD's make a decent parallel. You can choose between a top end surgeon or you can choose the surgeon who went to a lesser school and got lesser grades. Sure, the second surgeon might be trainable but you need surgery now. Are you willing to wait however long it takes for the second surgeon to up to snuff?

Essentially, companies cannot afford to wait/train guys to reach that next level - whatever it might be. The industries are evolving too rapidly. Now, there's an argument there about how to incentivize companies to train new hires but I don't know how successful it will be. In too many fields, if you sit out for a year you're going to be badly out-of-date with the latest developments. And we can't predict what they'll be.

At the extreme end of that spectrum, you can graduate college and have your freshman coursework no longer be relevant to the job market. So the time a company spends bringing you up to speed is kind of lost because by the time you get up to speed...you're already out of date.

And at the higher levels, not everyone is smart enough to get up to speed in the 1st place so that's another risk. You hire a guy to train and it turns out he can't handle the upper limit difficulties of the industry. But that's not just a U.S. problem, it's international. The difference is that the mid-level U.S. guys don't apply to jobs outside of the U.S. where they might be more competitive in the job market. Of course, they're losing out to higher end international labor.

I suspect that mid-level U.S. labor grossly overestimates it's quality advantage over foreign labor.
 
All these people talking about highly skilled, like that's the be-all end-all. . . I saw this discussion on reddit.

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

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:

HF4gYGr.jpg

hello uppercutbus,

Pan gives a pretty nuanced response to this in post #121. StrikerKing also did so in post #71.

i've searched for winning lawsuits that have been filed against employers for H1B visa abuse, and so far i've come up with nothing...so while i understand there are two sides to every argument, it appears that your claims, while heartfelt, seem to be invalid.

i guess the US really does need H1B visas if tech industries are to remain competitive and viable.

- IGIT
 
Last edited:
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.

They would if they had too.

Their lives are being subsidized.
 
I think it depends on the business. For small business owners (ie Americans) who operate on a low profit margin, they would most likely go out of business, as they don't have the volume to compete with larger entities and therefore would be driven out of the market with their higher prices.

hiya helltoupee,

maybe they would go out of business, i can't say for sure.

on one hand, costs would go up for the business...on the other hand, there might be more people who could afford to patronize said businesses if Americans ended up being paid more (without having illegal immigrants to exploit, i'm assuming pay would go up).

most immigration threads boil down to two things;

1) the right vs left dichotomy...or...

2) a robotic insistence that illegal immigrants gotta go, no matter what, since they're breaking the law by merely being here in the first place

i wasn't interested in that...i've never been interested in that. i just figure they're here because various industries in the US want them here, plain and simple.

i'm more curious as to whether their presence here, in the end, is beneficial to the country as a whole, economically, and whether they effect lower wage earners who are native born.

- IGIT
 
'afternoon, ManCityFC9,

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.

the point would stand, though, that illegal immigrants provide a net positive effect on the the economy.

whether or not their native born replacements would do so at the same economic efficiency is hypothetical, but we do know for sure is that "Americans won't work those kind of jobs", at least not at the current pay that's being provided.

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.

the Dream Act, which was bipartisan legislation, seems at the core just a practical piece of law. it's empathetic, sure, but its also just common-sense legislation. these kids have already been educated here, in our schools - and they've kept their noses clean.

they're assets. why send them back to Mexico/Central America? i kinda would prefer they remain US assets.

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.

here are my sources;

A study by The Sentencing Project, a criminal justice research and advocacy group, found that "foreign-born residents of the United States commit crime less often than native-born citizens."

Another study, by the libertarian Cato Institute, compares incarceration rates by migratory status, ethnicity and gender.
http://thehill.com/latino/324607-re...rants-commit-less-crime-than-us-born-citizens

also, from the New York Times;

But several studies, over many years, have concluded that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than people born in the United States. And experts say the available evidence does not support the idea that undocumented immigrants commit a disproportionate share of crime.

the fact that many illegal immigrants might end up incarcerated due to drug offenses doesn't alarm me, given the country's prehistoric "war on drugs".

i find the policy on this topic hopelessly outdated.

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.

as i said, this effect is unevenly spread across the nation. in some cases, it is a relatively minor concern...in other cases, these illegal workers make up a pretty large portion of the agribusiness workforce.

*salutes*


- IGIT
 
Last edited:
hiya helltoupee,

maybe they would go out of business, i can't say for sure.

on one hand, costs would go up for the business...on the other hand, there might be more people who could afford to patronize said businesses if Americans ended up being paid more (without having illegal immigrants to exploit, i'm assuming pay would go up).

most immigration threads boil down to two things;

1) the right vs left dichotomy...or...

2) a robotic insistence that illegal immigrants gotta go, no matter what, since they're breaking the law by merely being here in the first place

i wasn't interested in that...i've never been interested in that. i just figure they're here because various industries in the US want them here, plain and simple.

i'm more curious as to whether their presence here, in the end, is beneficial to the country as a whole, economically, and whether they effect lower wage earners who are native born.

- IGIT

Again, I think it depends on the business.

As I'm sure you are already aware, labor is usually a business' highest cost, and I'm assuming that said businesses who are employing illegals are paying them under the table. If you are now talking about the employer going legit, he now has to pay higher wages along with payroll taxes, worker's comp., maybe benefits, overtime, pto, sick time, etc etc etc - which would ultimately add quite a bit to his payroll expenses. It would all depend on whether or not the business' overhead could absorb that kind of increase without pricing themselves out of the market.

IMO, most of the businesses who employ illegals under the table are small businesses trying to compete with larger entities (big companies are usually more standardized with hiring practices, as there are big penalties in CA at least). So I think the effect would be that you would see, for example, the smaller mom and pop construction companies simply squeezed out by the Walmarts of building contractors - which is already happening to a certain extent - but this would be the nail in the coffin.
 
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


to wordy for me boy.

shortened it
 
Why do you even bother to reply?

ahoy helltoupee,

the subject matter interested him, but then the was foiled by those damn words.

so many of them!

he must prefer USA Today to the NYT, i guess. or possibly Twitter to USA Today.

- IGIT
 
ahoy helltoupee,

the subject matter interested him, but then the was foiled by those damn words.

so many of them!

he must prefer USA Today to the NYT, i guess. or possibly Twitter to USA Today.

- IGIT

Thanks. You are a helpful boy. I like my articles like I like my women. Short and Plain.
 
Thanks. You are a helpful boy. I like my articles like I like my women. Short and Plain.

herro again Handsomebwonderful,

i understand that reading is an anathema to many.

you have my condolences, my son.

- IGIT
 
'afternoon, ManCityFC9,



the point would stand, though, that illegal immigrants provide a net positive effect on the the economy.

whether or not their native born replacements would do so at the same economic efficiency is hypothetical, but we do know for sure is that "Americans won't work those kind of jobs", at least not at the current pay that's being provided.



the Dream Act, which was bipartisan legislation, seems at the core just a practical piece of law. it's empathetic, sure, but its also just common-sense legislation. these kids have already been educated here, in our schools - and they've kept their noses clean.

they're assets. why send them back to Mexico/Central America? i kinda would prefer they remain US assets.



here are my sources;



http://thehill.com/latino/324607-re...rants-commit-less-crime-than-us-born-citizens

also, from the New York Times;



the fact that many illegal immigrants might end up incarcerated due to drug offenses doesn't alarm me, given the country's prehistoric "war on drugs".

i find the policy on this topic hopelessly outdated.



as i said, this effect is unevenly spread across the nation. in some cases, it is a relatively minor concern...in other cases, these illegal workers make up a pretty large portion of the agribusiness workforce.

*salutes*


- IGIT


1. I'd disagree that the contribution or output in the economy would result in a complete void due to Americans not wanting to work those jobs.
$300-$600B and employers won't higher any legal workers/citizens in the event of illegal immigrants being removed? No way.
(Can't be considered simply hypothetical, it's just too big a void and businesses still want to make money)
-This point correlates with my earlier point that the agriculture occupations of undocumented immigrants are overstated.
--Most of the jobs undocumented immigrants do could/would be (at least partially, 70%) substituted by American Citizens/legal immigrants(construction, restaurant/service, production/installation/repair)
---"Americans won't do these jobs" is quite overstated, Employers are the ones really picking the cheaper option.

2. The DREAM Act was drafted by a bipartisan effort but it is a derivative("mirror bill") of the "Student Adjustment Act of 2001"
-DREAM Act was constantly brought up in the House during the Democratic Party dominance but before upcoming midterms and the 2012 Presidential election
--So though seeming empathetic, It is definitely political ammo used to garner latin american votes especially.
---Also consider that Undocumented immigrants have a lower education level than their Native counterparts
("47% have not completed high school compared to 8% of US citizens who have not completed high school")
-http://undocumentedpatients.org/issuebrief/demographics-and-socioeconomic-status/

One more point on this:
http://immigrationimpact.com/2016/01/14/children-of-undocumented-immigrants/
"US Children are at a clear disadvantage if they have at least one undocumented parent; they are more likely to experience poverty, lower levels of preschool enrollment, linguistic isolation, limited English Proficiency, and reduced chances of socioeconomic mobility"
-With respects to your point, there isn't a large talent pool that we're missing without DREAMers.

3-4. "Cato Report"
-Good source and fair point,
illegal immigrants are twice as likely to be incarcerated than their legal counterparts
--Also 18-54 is a very large age bracket which is how the statistics are taken
but your point is taken
Also consider
-- the vetting/visa process to get legal work status in this country is a bit robust and does accept those with a higher skill level and no criminal background, as opposed to those who migrate here illegally.
---The exception would be those with expired visas(though I am not sure how long you can maintain employment with an expired visa)
--My source focused on federal sentencing which has more of a correlation to drugs/cartels and is a smaller number of crimes but the same cannot be said for the impact that is associated.
(drugs crimes have grown in this country)

5. As for agriculture; I guess we can agree to disagree.
My viewpoint remains from a national level and from that perspective, Agriculture only represents 1.3% of US GDP; and only 4% of illegal immigrants occupy jobs in that field.(The void is currently there and will not change too much if undocumented immigrants were removed.)


In conclusion though, I'd just like the legal process to be enforced and I think any pros from undocumented immigrants will be exacerbated and cons would be partially mitigated, if immigration reform and law enforcement occurs.

Cheers buddy, I'll stay tuned to your thread.
 
I don't think you quite understand.

You are ineligible for benefits/welfare etc. if you are an illegal immigrant.

You must have legal status to qualify, so not sure what you mean by the above.

Let me answer you this with a question...

Does the state have the resources to check every single person immigration status in the u.s.?

But I'm done talking about this with a guy who doesn't have a clue about this issue
 
hello uppercutbus,

Pan gives a pretty nuanced response to this in post #121. StrikerKing also did so in post #71.

i've searched for winning lawsuits that have been filed against employers for H1B visa abuse, and so far i've come up with nothing...so while i understand there are two sides to every argument, it appears that your claims, while heartfelt, seem to be invalid.

i guess the US really does need H1B visas if tech industries are to remain competitive and viable.

- IGIT

None of those are about the IT sector, let alone the administration and support side which is what my post is about.

Also these aren't heartfelt invalid claims with no evidence either. Suing an employer is an extreme case of tackling outsourcing and shouldn't be used as a metric to measure whether it happens or is a negative (or not). The purpose of the link is to show how it affects the IT sector, the suing part is not really the issue since you can't usually sue for that. The case is egregious because the company wanted to hire Indians exclusively. It is also a indicator of the wider issue in that industry.

The agriculture occupations of undocumented immigrants are overstated.

Most of the jobs undocumented immigrants do could/would be (at least partially, 70%) substituted by American Citizens/legal immigrants (construction, restaurant/service, production/installation/repair)

"Americans won't do these jobs" is quite overstated, Employers are the ones really picking the cheaper option.

Oh definitely to all the above.
 
hello colby25,

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/

as i said earlier, illegal immigrants surely must pay into public education. they either own their homes or they rent, and in either case, they're paying property taxes (either directly or indirectly).

i'm not really pro or anti illegal immigration, for the purposes of this thread.

i'm trying to get a better understanding as to whether they are a net boon to the US economy or whether their presence in the US is deleterious.

- IGIT

Hahaha oh you guys are funny.

I'm done talking about this issue. Take care. This is almost as bad as debating religion in here
 
foster made a good post some time ago about the negatives of illegals:

http://forums.sherdog.com/posts/127160143/

I think Trump exaggerated when he linked illegals (in this case illegal Mexican aliens) to violent crimes. I lived in an immigrant neighborhood through out most my high school and college years. They don't commit violent crimes to my personal experience but they DO COMMIT CRIMES not out of malice but as a cultural norm and necessity.

A lot my HS friends were Mexican immigrants or 1st generation so they have a lot of relatives who are illegals so I'm familiar with their struggles. Basically they all want to lay low and get a good paying job, send their money back to Mexico and not bother anyone. But since you're illegal, you have to do illegal things to live. You have to drive so you need a license and you need a SS # for a license. What if you don't have one? then you have to fake. Then when you get a job, it's most likely be cash and you don't pay taxes.

But this is where things get bad. In order to LAY LOW you have to do everything you can to not get attention from the authorities. Things like reporting an accident, reporting a crimes, ect. In 9th grade I got hit by a Mexican driver on my bike and he took off, my bike was all messed up. Most likely he didn't have insurance and most likely he was illegal and not even have a license.

My HS Mexican friend said it's very common for his uncle/cousin, ect.. to drive without a license left alone insurance. I remember him driving me around and every time he saw a police car, his hands shook. He was born here but it was just the culture that he was in: ignoring the rules is the NORM, not the exception. When you're illegal, what's the point of following little rules? you might as well be illegal the whole way.

In college, I lived in a ghetto apartment building. Very bad neighborhood, you need to lock the gate at all time. Well, the Mexicans there ignored the rule and placed a rock to keep the gate open AT ALL TIMES so their 50 or so relatives can come in and out all day. First, we complained to them, they pretended to not understand English, then the manger talked to them... this happened 20+ times to the point we gave up.... Well, BAD THINGS started happening to the building: graffiti, things started missing... and my favorite: tires were getting slashed almost weekly because the idiots allowed the hoods to roam free in the building. I'm pretty sure the Mexicans didn't do it but they sure CAUSED it.

Yes, you can say they're poor and have sympathy for them but they create this culture of lawlessness that is the source of all kinds of ills and evil because they started out ignoring the rules due to their illegal status.

Worse yet, the grown up illegals are not prone to violence since they just want to lay low and make a living. But the children of the illegals, either came here as kids or born here... being disenfranchised, disillusioned from being considered illegitimate, they are problems: gangs, violence, petty crimes that lead to violent crimes... How do I know? I used to hang out with them in HS. The first generation are the worst... all stem from being of the invisible status that they started out with.

Now imagine, instead of having 100 illegal families that started out wrong and foster generations of a detached, angry, disenfranchised subculture, how about having 10 families that are legal and LEGITIMATE, that love America, that have strong self esteem from being respected that become real productive Americans? Everyone would win.

read the post above to see what he means, the fucking balls on these illegals.

 
hi uppercutbus,

None of those are about the IT sector, let alone the administration and support side which is what my post is about.

assuming Information Tech is part of the STEM fields, both pan's post and StrikerKing did kind of address your points.

Also these aren't heartfelt invalid claims with no evidence either. Suing an employer is an extreme case of tackling outsourcing and shouldn't be used as a metric to measure whether it happens or is a negative (or not). The purpose of the link is to show how it affects the IT sector, the suing part is not really the issue since you can't usually sue for that. The case is egregious because the company wanted to hire Indians exclusively. It is also a indicator of the wider issue in that industry.

i'm just saying that its difficult to check the veracity of these claims - surely there would be a long queue of attorneys seeking to litigate against these wealthy firms if the abuses you cited were reality.

that's all i'm sayin'.

- IGIT



Oh definitely to all the above.[/QUOTE]
 
1. I'd disagree that the contribution or output in the economy would result in a complete void due to Americans not wanting to work those jobs.
$300-$600B and employers won't higher any legal workers/citizens in the event of illegal immigrants being removed? No way.
(Can't be considered simply hypothetical, it's just too big a void and businesses still want to make money)
-This point correlates with my earlier point that the agriculture occupations of undocumented immigrants are overstated.
--Most of the jobs undocumented immigrants do could/would be (at least partially, 70%) substituted by American Citizens/legal immigrants(construction, restaurant/service, production/installation/repair)
---"Americans won't do these jobs" is quite overstated, Employers are the ones really picking the cheaper option.

2. The DREAM Act was drafted by a bipartisan effort but it is a derivative("mirror bill") of the "Student Adjustment Act of 2001"
-DREAM Act was constantly brought up in the House during the Democratic Party dominance but before upcoming midterms and the 2012 Presidential election
--So though seeming empathetic, It is definitely political ammo used to garner latin american votes especially.
---Also consider that Undocumented immigrants have a lower education level than their Native counterparts
("47% have not completed high school compared to 8% of US citizens who have not completed high school")
-http://undocumentedpatients.org/issuebrief/demographics-and-socioeconomic-status/

One more point on this:
http://immigrationimpact.com/2016/01/14/children-of-undocumented-immigrants/
"US Children are at a clear disadvantage if they have at least one undocumented parent; they are more likely to experience poverty, lower levels of preschool enrollment, linguistic isolation, limited English Proficiency, and reduced chances of socioeconomic mobility"
-With respects to your point, there isn't a large talent pool that we're missing without DREAMers.

3-4. "Cato Report"
-Good source and fair point,
illegal immigrants are twice as likely to be incarcerated than their legal counterparts
--Also 18-54 is a very large age bracket which is how the statistics are taken
but your point is taken
Also consider
-- the vetting/visa process to get legal work status in this country is a bit robust and does accept those with a higher skill level and no criminal background, as opposed to those who migrate here illegally.
---The exception would be those with expired visas(though I am not sure how long you can maintain employment with an expired visa)
--My source focused on federal sentencing which has more of a correlation to drugs/cartels and is a smaller number of crimes but the same cannot be said for the impact that is associated.
(drugs crimes have grown in this country)

5. As for agriculture; I guess we can agree to disagree.
My viewpoint remains from a national level and from that perspective, Agriculture only represents 1.3% of US GDP; and only 4% of illegal immigrants occupy jobs in that field.(The void is currently there and will not change too much if undocumented immigrants were removed.)


In conclusion though, I'd just like the legal process to be enforced and I think any pros from undocumented immigrants will be exacerbated and cons would be partially mitigated, if immigration reform and law enforcement occurs.

Cheers buddy, I'll stay tuned to your thread.

hello again ManCityFC9,

so many points, too many to address.

i'll just speak to a few of them.

when you look at the economic activity that the illegal immigrants create, its significant. that's all i'm saying...and it more than compensates for their costs to the taxpayer.

i never said that in the absence of these workers, that none of this would be made up by US workers (if you look to my OP, i said as much). you've said that 70% of the jobs done by illegal immigrants would be simply replaced by American workers.

maybe.

maybe not. your guess is as good as mine.

we can debate whether the Dream Act was an empathetic bit of legislature. surely to the Dreamers, it was. if you're saying that its impossible that the motivation for this legislation bi-partisan legislation was purely cynical - i guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

clearly the illegal immigrants play a major role in agribusiness in some states, Georgia, Florida and Idaho, while not-so-much other ones.

the main thrust of my thread to get a better feel for whether having illegal immigrants in our country working is ultimately a net plus for the economy - and to try and gauge their effects (or lack thereof) on working class incomes.

ICE, along with state and local LEO enforcing the law is an interesting issue, but not really related to the question i posed in the OP.

- IGIT
 
Last edited:
Hahaha oh you guys are funny.

I'm done talking about this issue. Take care. This is almost as bad as debating religion in here

hello colby25,

no offense, but you seem to have had a great deal of trouble talking factually about the issue. i agree that its probably best that you excuse yourself from this thread.

- IGIT
 
Last edited:
Back
Top