Immigrants are Good, Even for the Poor!
March 11th 2010 00:22
Mark Krikorian is wrong on immigration again. In response to a proposed wage subsidy (my highlighting added):
How many times must it be shown that immigrants do NOT cause more crime and DO benefit the economy? Low-skilled immigrants do not, in general, compete with low-skilled Americans, except for maybe high-school dropouts. Rather, low-skilled immigrants either create a need for higher-level supervisors, which go to Americans, or they are replacing what would have been done by technology instead.
Immigrants coming into America create increased demand and allow for more specialization, which both improve the economy. As can be seen by this recession, when the economy doesn't grow, it isn't so good for the poor. Decreasing immigration will make America, and the poor, even poorer.
By the way, what makes the well-being of high school dropouts count, but not the well-being of immigrants? And how is it that Congress can stop illegal immigration "any time it feels like"?
All that being said, in reference to the wage subsidy idea, I would favor an elimination of the payroll tax instead.
Follow me on Twitter: @AGoldenDoor
Unfortunately, he doesn't even mention the one step that would cost nothing and use the market in "fighting crime, alleviating poverty and inculcating the habits essential to long-term success." Namely, tightening the labor market by reducing immigration, both permanent and "temporary," legal and illegal, something Congress can do any time it feels like. Despite the recession, the federal immigration program continues to legally import something like 100,000 working-age people from abroad each month, disproportionately less-skilled, who will compete directly with the very less-skilled Americans (and earlier immigrants) that Salam is rightly concerned about. Just since 2000, immigration (legal and illegal combined) has increased the supply of high school dropouts by something like 15 percent.
There are many reasons for the stagnant or declining prospects of poor workers, immigration being only one of them. But it's simply absurd to talk about wage subsidies or minimum-wage increases or any similar government initiative to improve opportunity for the working poor until we stop subverting their job prospects through another discretionary government initiative.
There are many reasons for the stagnant or declining prospects of poor workers, immigration being only one of them. But it's simply absurd to talk about wage subsidies or minimum-wage increases or any similar government initiative to improve opportunity for the working poor until we stop subverting their job prospects through another discretionary government initiative.
How many times must it be shown that immigrants do NOT cause more crime and DO benefit the economy? Low-skilled immigrants do not, in general, compete with low-skilled Americans, except for maybe high-school dropouts. Rather, low-skilled immigrants either create a need for higher-level supervisors, which go to Americans, or they are replacing what would have been done by technology instead.
Immigrants coming into America create increased demand and allow for more specialization, which both improve the economy. As can be seen by this recession, when the economy doesn't grow, it isn't so good for the poor. Decreasing immigration will make America, and the poor, even poorer.
By the way, what makes the well-being of high school dropouts count, but not the well-being of immigrants? And how is it that Congress can stop illegal immigration "any time it feels like"?
All that being said, in reference to the wage subsidy idea, I would favor an elimination of the payroll tax instead.
Follow me on Twitter: @AGoldenDoor
| 38 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
