Immigration in the US

Fart

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 26, 2002
Messages
23
Location
Albany NY
I'm all for it

I think it would be good economially because it will give us a lot of cheap labor. Low skilled labor is in high demand in the US and that's why so many US factories are being moved to other countries. More cheap labor will allow us to keep our factories close to home which will be more efficient. Also cheap labor can be used for Service and Construction two very big industries here, more immigration will give us better service and bigger houses and buildings etc. If you are a low skilled laborer in the US the you should not want more immigration because it will bring your wage down but if you're a high skilled laborer you should because it will give you more employees to make stuff and will give a higher quality of life through service an construction.

I also think it's good for population growth. The rest of the worlds population has been growing very fast while the developed nations haven't. When large undeveloped nations start developing our economy will be less significant compared to the rest of the world. Plus more population will give us more tax revenues to pay for the military and the national debt. And it will give the military more men. Plus the second generation of immigrants can have a chance at collage and become part of the skilled workforce. I heard half of our population growth is due to immigration.

Some are against immigration because there are some immigrants who go on welfare or take from our Medicare Medicaid and social security, but I heard some wear that the overall taxes of immigrants actually just pay for the benefits they get, since you have to subtract the amount of immigrant taxes that go to the military and national debt. Some are against immigration because they tend to vote democrat because it's in their interest to do so. But I say if there are more poorer people to vote in their economic interests there will be more middle class who will vote republican in their interests because the median income will go down. And when immigrants work their way up they will vote republican. In history there is no connection to how much immigrants there are and how well the dems or republicans are doing.

I also think it's good because it will allow lots of poor people in the world to have a chance to work and have a better life for them and their children. Their children will have a chance to go to collage. Most of our ancestors were immigrants and most of them came here poor. If you read what a lot of critics said about immigration back then it was the same argument it is today, that there poor and unable make anything of themselves, that they create slums and how immigration was always better in the past. It was the same argument with each group of immigrants who came and look how their children turned out. The US used to let in a lot of immigrants in the past until the quotas in the twenties and the great depression. Since the 80s we have been letting more in but if you compare it two our population not nearly has much has we did in the past. When we reached our highest record in the 1880's our population was only 50 million

Don't you think we should have more immigration?
 
I don't. I think some of your opinions, or statements I should say, are wishful thinking. Realistically, it would raise the levels of pollution, poverty, and crime.

"The rest of the worlds population has been growing very fast while the developed nations haven't. When large undeveloped nations start developing our economy will be less significant compared to the rest of the world."

Where's the problem? We ARE developed so why jeopardize it with the above things I mentioned? Overpopulation would be bad. It could contribute to these problems you speak of. Just my 2 cents and I ain't no expert. :)
 
I agree with you, Fart. But it goes much deeper than "it's good for us economically". It's much deeper than that: the U.S. was founded by immigrants seeking a better life, and now we, the children of immigrants, want to deny other immigrants. Let's face it--what makes the U.S. great (and resultingly half the world hating the U.S. just because they are great) is that it's made up of those people. A melting pot--of people who stuck their head out. Even the African slaves--they were forced into it, but still the end result is a new and better life for their children.

Immigration definitely needs to be controlled and regulated, but it should be allowed. It doesn't just benefit our economy--it's who we are. Also I'll point out that the immigrants I see every day are hardly of the "poor, cheap labor" type. We're talking Ph.D.'s in engineering, particle physics researchers, etc. from China and India becoming naturalized U.S. citizens.
 
I don't have a problem with immigration, but...
Originally posted by Fart
I think it would be good economially because it will give us a lot of cheap labor.

The big reason that companies go overseas to 'sweatshops' and the like is because they don't have to pay U.S. minimum wage to workers in other countries. If the workers come here, they will have to be paid more, so the companies will still go overseas.

Please base your defense of the idea on something defendable.:D
 
Originally posted by Padma
I don't have a problem with immigration, but...


The big reason that companies go overseas to 'sweatshops' and the like is because they don't have to pay U.S. minimum wage to workers in other countries. If the workers come here, they will have to be paid more, so the companies will still go overseas.

Please base your defense of the idea on something defendable.:D

Supply and demand, you couldn't raise the minimum wage to 45 dollars an hour because no one will pay a non collage graduate that much. The reason were able to have a higher minimum wage than most countries is because we have a much higher proportion of high skilled workers and that brings labor here in high demand because of service, construction, and some factories need to be close to home(I know I say high skilled and low skilled a lot). If you were to get rid of minimum wage people won't start working for a dollar a day salaries because no sane person will work for that much in the United States. Minimum wage is purposely set to what the government thinks the demand for low skilled labor is. If we had a lot more low skilled workers the minimum wage would have to go down or lots of people will be out of work. Employers won't pay people more than there work is worth.

I know immigration is about more than helping the economy but I'm just trying to convince people that immigration is good for most of us
 
Just some clarifications.
Originally posted by Fart

The reason we're able to have a higher minimum wage than most countries...

Compared to G-8 and EU United States has a very low minimum wage.

If you were to get rid of minimum wage people won't start working for a dollar a day salaries because no sane person will work for that much in the United States. Minimum wage is purposely set to what the government thinks the demand for low skilled labor is.


Why would the governement need to set a minimum wage if it was going to base it on what the market demands? Why not just let the market decide then? It's not set to represent the demand for low skilled labour, it is set to make sure that low skilled labourers make enough to live on.
 
Immigration good. :goodjob:

I'm a big fan of immigrants, even though I am against opening the flood gates. We're not interested in cheap labor. The kind of open immigration I'd prefer would be foreigners that came here to get education (Rich + smart, we'll keep them), and anyone else internationally who has something going for them already, and make it easier for them to become legal residents.
 
It may be that I'm a little biased on this one...:rolleyes:

But immigration is a great thing and nearly all societies that have large amounts of it benefit immensely in the long run.

A favorite quote from, I believe, an American 1920s journalist: "America has always had a problem with illegal immigration. Ask any Indian..." :lol:

Yes, Floppa21 is right that large amounts of immigrants usually results in ethnic tensions, disparate living standards, which leads to higher crime levels, etc. and all the things he described and more. BUT, it also provides cheap labor and new cultural perspectives that over time benefit all concerned. And it's not only the Americans who are all immigrants; most Europeans also derive from Asian migrant populations that wandered into Europe from the eastern Steppes or Anatolia, many in historical times. Hindu India is also derived from a migrant population, etc. etc. etc. Humans have been on the move much moreso than they've been settled, actually.

And from a purely genetic perspective, it is far healthier for a population for people to "procreate" as far outside of their immediate genetic environment as possible; mix n' match!
 
"Where's the problem? We ARE developed so why jeopardize it with the above things I mentioned? Overpopulation would be bad. It could contribute to these problems you speak of. Just my 2 cents and I ain't no expert."

We're hardly overpopulated. Look at Europe, barely larger than the US in area yet containing more than twice as many people. Not to mention Japan.... And they do quite well.

We could double our population and still not be crowded, compared to some very prosperous areas of Western Europe or Japan.

Immigrants generally reflect those people of the world who take risks, who venture to make things happen--they do often take great journeys, abandoning all that is familiar, at great expense both monetary and personal. These are the kind of people who fit in well with a society based on the values of entrepreneurship and self-reliance. Yes there are some immigrants who seem to come for the welfare state, but I believe they are but a small percentage. Most come to make more of themselves than what they could (or were allowed to do) at home. We should feel honored that so many of these types of people want to come here--and we should welcome them eagerly!
 
As for increased crime, I've seen two formerly "bad" areas of the Twin Cities TRANSFORMED into bustling, lively areas full of growing businesses founded largely by Mexican, Hmong, Somali, and other nationality immigrants. Anyone familiar for a long time with the Twin Cities can testify that the Bloomington-Lake area of Minneapolis and the Midway/University-Lexington area of St. Paul were both quite blighted and dangerous areas, with condemned old buildings and shops and many hopeless people, just 10 or 15 years ago. Now they are vital neighborhoods, safe for the new families that have begun making their livelihoods in them. Hundreds of small shopkeepers and bigger immigrant businessmen have begun living the American dream, and I personally was amazed (having seen both the "before" and "after" over the years) at how these neighborhoods have changed to the point that I wouldn't mind living in them myself....

I maintain that immigrants represent a net positive force--and many Twin Citians, having seen the same direct evidence, agree....
 
I don't think that half the world hate the US just because they are great. I think that they hate them for other reasons too.....
No I pretty much hate them because they are so great.


Overpopulation would be bad.
A recent study in the UK stated that in 50 years time the UK population will no longer increase without immigrantion. So I hardly think overpopulation is a problem in developed countries. Remember what is on the Statue of Liberty, "Bring me the tired, the poor, the huddled masses" etc. If you want to end immigrantion then first get rid of this because if you ask them they will come.
 
Originally posted by Whiskey Priest
Just some clarifications.


Compared to G-8 and EU United States has a very low minimum wage.



Why would the governement need to set a minimum wage if it was going to base it on what the market demands? Why not just let the market decide then? It's not set to represent the demand for low skilled labour, it is set to make sure that low skilled labourers make enough to live on. [/B]

Peoples pay has to be somewhere around what there work is worth. If all you have to do is raise the minimum wage to give people higher salaries then why don't developing nations just raise there minimum to first world standards? They can't because no one will pay them that much and lots of people will be out of work. The reason you can have high minimum wages in first world countries is because labor is in high demand for things like service, construction, factories, etc. If you got rid of minimum wage in first world countries laborers won't just start working for really cheap dollar a day salaries because there work is worth a lot more than that just by being in a first world country. An employer couldn't really underpay his or her employee because they would just go work for someone else. Minimum wage has to be somewhere around the market value for labor.
 
Let me see if I understand you clearly. Are you saying that the governement imposed minimum wage laws are created to represent the value of low skilled labour?
 
Originally posted by Whiskey Priest
Let me see if I understand you clearly. Are you saying that the governement imposed minimum wage laws are created to represent the value of low skilled labour?

Well there are some people who argue that a minimum wage is not necessary. I'm not one, I guess supply and demand doesn't always work perfectly and I guess minimum wage brings up laborers salaries some but you can understand why it has to be somewhere around the demand.
 
If you got rid of minimum wage in first world countries laborers won't just start working for really cheap dollar a day salaries because there work is worth a lot more than that just by being in a first world country.
This is wrong. The value of their work is the same in both developed and developing countries. The reason that a worker in a developed country won't work for the same wages as someone in a developing countries is to do with the price of goods. The value of wages are not their nominal value but their real value, i.e. what those wages can buy in goods. If you had a wage of $100,000 a year then you would be considered well off. However if it cost you say $100,000 for a normal car then the value of the wages would be considerably less.

An employer couldn't really underpay his or her employee because they would just go work for someone else.
This again can be considered wrong. It can only be true if there was a perfect labour market. This means that all labour is the same, no monopsonys, no trade unions, no discrimination, no immobility of labour etc. As you have probably guessed this cannot exist in the real world. So an employer could underpay his/her employees. However there is a problem with the word "underpay", does this mean below the market value? or a very low wage relative to other workers? because in theory a market value wage could be a wage barely enough to live on. For example, say an employee worked in a low-skilled job getting a decent wage (for their job) then suddenly a group of people arrive looking for a job and not bothered about the wage (i.e. migrations from a poorer region). The market wage rate would drop accordingly, so the employee would be doing the same job but the wage rate would now be considered very low. I know this is a simple explanation but I think it gets over the basic points.
 
1. Immigrants have on average higher education than native born Americans

2. Immigrants are also more likley to have a PhD than a native born American

3. And less then 1% of the Refugees in the world ends up in the US


I read these numbers, and many more, on an American website a few days ago, but I dont remember the URL, sorry.

But the numbers doesn´t surprise me at all. Immigration of skilled foreign workers and scientists has been the foundation of american progress and advances for decades. The education quality given to the broad masses of US born citizens are well known to be very poor compared to most 1st world and even many 2nd world countries.

Although there are some "elite" schools and universities that are very good but this alone can´t satisfy the demand on the market. Also a very large percentage of the students on these fine schools and universites are infact foreign nationals, and so are the professors and so on...

My point is, that the United States has alot to thank the immigrants for. US wouldn´t be where it is today if it wasnt for the immigration during the last five decades.
 
Originally posted by basta72
But the numbers doesn´t surprise me at all. Immigration of skilled foreign workers and scientists has been the foundation of american progress and advances for decades. The education quality given to the broad masses of US born citizens are well known to be very poor compared to most 1st world and even many 2nd world countries.
To be fair, the education given is very inconsistant and not necessarily poor. The education bought, however, is amongst the best in the world. The average American is more likely to hold a University degree than any other nation (24%, the Netherlands are closest with 21% followed by Canada with 17%).
 
Top Bottom