• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The so-called scourge of undocumented immigrants examined scientifically

Suppose an immigrant crosses the border from Canada into the US. He gets a job sweeping floors and cleaning up at a local factory, and he works off the books.

Specifically, who is being harmed by his actions?
The legal immigrant or citizen that would have had that job, the competing businesses who are not cheating by using illegal, low cost labor, and every other legal worker in the country who is not receiving tax-free wages.

Other than that, no one.
 
The legal immigrant or citizen that would have had that job,

So when one person takes a job it automatically harms another person? If what you are saying is true, then the legal status of the worker is irrelevant.

Consider the same idea in a different context. Suppose the very beautiful Tina decides to date Bob. All of the other men who wanted to date Tina are pissed off, but were they actually harmed by her decision to date Bob?

A job belongs to the person who offers it. If employer Tina chooses to hire Bob, that's too bad for the other people who wanted to work for Tina, but they have not been harmed by either Tina or Bob.

the competing businesses who are not cheating by using illegal, low cost labor, and every other legal worker in the country who is not receiving tax-free wages.

Ah, the old "misery loves company" argument. If my business is being hammered by taxes and regulation, and your business finds a way around those burdens, then you are harming me (somehow).

Other than that, no one.
 
The legal immigrant or citizen that would have had that job, the competing businesses who are not cheating by using illegal, low cost labor, and every other legal worker in the country who is not receiving tax-free wages.

Other than that, no one.
We have more jobs than people in this country- now by a record number. The labor shortage is one of the big things hurting the economy right now. This is not a legitimate argument. Try something else.

 
So when one person takes a job it automatically harms another person? If what you are saying is true, then the legal status of the worker is irrelevant.
Yes, it does. Where there's fair competition for the job, them's the breaks. But it's not fair when a person here legally loses out to someone who is going to work tax-free, and thus illegally. In short, the illegal immigrant and the employer are cheating the legal applicant out of a job.

Consider the same idea in a different context. Suppose the very beautiful Tina decides to date Bob. All of the other men who wanted to date Tina are pissed off, but were they actually harmed by her decision to date Bob?
Why yes. Sexual tension can cause serious health issues. I've been telling Mrs. Morton that for years.

A job belongs to the person who offers it. If employer Tina chooses to hire Bob, that's too bad for the other people who wanted to work for Tina, but they have not been harmed by either Tina or Bob.
No, see above. A job does not belong to someone who is breaking the law to acquire that job.

Ah, the old "misery loves company" argument. If my business is being hammered by taxes and regulation, and your business finds a way around those burdens, then you are harming me (somehow).
Yes, when one business illegally avoids labor costs it creates an unfair advantage to competitors that are operating by the rules. Do you really not see that?
 
We have more jobs than people in this country- now by a record number. The labor shortage is one of the big things hurting the economy right now. This is not a legitimate argument. Try something else.

And when the next recession arrives, then what?
 
And when the next recession arrives, then what?

Recessions have happened in the past when the population of the country was a 10th of its size today. It will happen in the future when the population may be much bigger. But when it does come, it will happen to a much bigger economy, and so the subsequent recovery will be much bigger. That’s just the natural business cycle. You can’t stifle the economy’s growth for that.

Economies which have purposely remained isolationist and restricted their immigration have suffered and have been forced to revisit their policies. Restricting immigration does nothing other than stifle economic growth.

 
If that's true, then we should drastically raise minimum wage laws and reap the benefits. Agreed?

Many (if not most) states have already done so. The prevailing wages for most construction and service jobs are already above the MW.
 
These people are unbelievably hard working and, frankly, willing to do jobs that the vast majority of native born Americans simply won't do. When paid on the books they pay their taxes and here's a newsflash - - their involvement in crime of any sort is very substantially lower than that of native born American citizens.

So can someone remind me why we get our panties in an uproar over their presence in our country?


View attachment 67416486
Some are, some are criminals. All are entering the country illegally. If the nation, democrats or republicans are unhappy with immigration law they should change it, not ignore it. Democrats have had at least 2 opportunities to change immigration law and they didn't touch it. Illegal immigration should not be tolerated, fix it. Change the rules to allow guest workers, or shorten the period for becoming a US citizen. Do something besides ignore the massive problem on the southern border.
 
Don't know why you're so upset. I said I understand. We're going to count only some lawbreaking but not all lawbreaking. Yes, I think that's an excellent way of showing that law breakers don't always break laws.
I see that your statement of fact has angered the virue signallers.
 
Many (if not most) states have already done so. The prevailing wages for most construction and service jobs are already above the MW.

Yes, governments do all kinds of things, but that doesn't mean those things result in a net benefit.

You wrote:

The economic benefit of higher wages is increased consumer demand.

If this is what you believe, do you support drastically raising the minimum wage in order to reap the benefit of increased consumer demand?

A simple yes or no will suffice.
 
Yes, it does. Where there's fair competition for the job, them's the breaks.

First of all, the concept of fairness is not defined by government law. If you disagree, I'd be happy to provide an endless stream of examples, starting with the trial of Jesus and working forward time-wise from there.

But it's not fair when a person here legally loses out to someone who is going to work tax-free, and thus illegally. In short, the illegal immigrant and the employer are cheating the legal applicant out of a job.

Why yes. Sexual tension can cause serious health issues. I've been telling Mrs. Morton that for years.

While that did make me laugh, you are evading the issue.

Imagine that Tina is white and Bob is black, and they are living in the American south at a time when anti-miscegenation laws are in place and enforced.

Under these circumstances, would you want Tina to be punished for illegally choosing Bob to date instead of a white man? After all, it's not "fair" to the white guys, since Tina and Bob's relationship is illegal.
 
First of all, the concept of fairness is not defined by government law. If you disagree, I'd be happy to provide an endless stream of examples, starting with the trial of Jesus and working forward time-wise from there.
The hell it isn't. Government's principal role in any market is to maintain the fairness of that market. The market participant that breaks the law by hiring untaxed employees, and thus lowering his costs, is cheating and should be held to account.


While that did make me laugh, you are evading the issue.
No, just trying to lighten things up a bit. We usually agree on things.

Imagine that Tina is white and Bob is black, and they are living in the American south at a time when anti-miscegenation laws are in place and enforced.

Under these circumstances, would you want Tina to be punished for illegally choosing Bob to date instead of a white man? After all, it's not "fair" to the white guys, since Tina and Bob's relationship is illegal.
You've stretched this analogy beyond any relevance to the topic a hand. This is not that complex. One company plays by the rules (i.e. the law). Another does not. Either you think that is fair or you do not. Which is it?
 
Yes, governments do all kinds of things, but that doesn't mean those things result in a net benefit.

You wrote:



If this is what you believe, do you support drastically raising the minimum wage in order to reap the benefit of increased consumer demand?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

No. A “drastic” increase in the MW would simply discourage many from gain the skills to do more than entry level work. That’s the major problem with those who want the MW to become a “living wage”. Trying to make a McJob serve as a McCareer is a bad idea.

Your assertion that having a constant flow of low skilled/educated immigrant (legal or not) labor is good (better?) for economy is BS. After all, their US born offspring gain instant citizenship and qualify for all manner of “safety net” assistance.
 
The other law breaking the open borders crowd likes to ignore concerns work. These folks will tell you how valuable illegals are to the community as they "do work that most other people don't want to do." Well, if they're working and here illegally, they are most certainly working under the table and not paying taxes. That's a felony, so we're not just talking about ignoring immigration law violations.

But yes, so long as we ignore the laws illegal immigrants break, they don't break many laws at all.
taxes they instead have to charge to the middle class to sustain the cost of living for more and more illegal immigrants who concurrently get paid low illegal wages (for a citizen)

it's quite the snowball effect. I'm not sure 80cent apples are worth that.
 
Your assertion that having a constant flow of low skilled/educated immigrant (legal or not) labor is good (better?) for economy is BS.

Suppose there were a robot that walks around and can perform simple jobs, and the price of the robot if you want to rent it is $2 per hour.

In your opinion, would the existence of that robot be a net loss or a net gain for society?

After all, their US born offspring gain instant citizenship and qualify for all manner of “safety net” assistance.

No different from a native having a baby who gains instant citizenship and qualifies for all manner of "safety net" assistance. Why is the birth of one child good, but the other bad, when they both have exactly the same rights and privileges?
 
Back
Top Bottom