LOL -- A warning from Napolitano

[Danzig]

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/05/doe...ion-cost-jobs/


Summary
Do immigrants take American jobs? It’s a common refrain among those who want to tighten limits on legal immigration and deny a "path to citizenship" — which they call "amnesty" — to the millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. There’s even a new Reclaim American Jobs Caucus in the House, with at least 41 members.

But most economists and other experts say there’s little to support the claim. Study after study has shown that immigrants grow the economy, expanding demand for goods and services that the foreign-born workers and their families consume, and thereby creating jobs. There is even broad agreement among economists that while immigrants may push down wages for some, the overall effect is to increase average wages for American-born workers.

also:

But whether they’re legal, as in the CFAW ad, or illegal, as in our two other examples, really doesn’t matter for the purpose of answering our question: The truth is that immigrants don’t "take American jobs," according to most economists and others who have studied the issue.

Immigrant workers "create almost as many" jobs as they occupy, "and maybe more," said Madeleine Sumption, policy analyst at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, which is funded by a range of foundations, corporations and international organizations. "They often create the jobs they work in." In addition, "they buy things, and they make the economy bigger," she told us. As she and a co-author wrote in a report last year for a group created by the British government:

Somerville and Sumption: [T]he impact of immigration [on a nation's economy] remains small, for several reasons. Immigrants are not competitive in many types of jobs, and hence are not direct substitutes for natives. Local employers increase demand for low-skilled labor in areas that receive low-skilled immigrant inflows. Immigrants contribute to demand for goods and services that they consume, in turn increasing the demand for labor. And immigrants contribute to labor market efficiency and long-term economic growth.

[Princess Doreen]

Three different web-sites listing the pros and cons of illegal immigration -

http://immigration.procon.org/view.r...ourceID=000842

http://www.balancedpolitics.org/immigration.htm

http://www.illegalimmigrationstatist...pros-and-cons/

[Danzig]

3 with pros and cons? shocking. you'd think it would be all cons seeing as how it's a bunch of lawbreakers.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/05/doe...ion-cost-jobs/


Summary
Do immigrants take American jobs? It’s a common refrain among those who want to tighten limits on legal immigration and deny a "path to citizenship" — which they call "amnesty" — to the millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. There’s even a new Reclaim American Jobs Caucus in the House, with at least 41 members.

But most economists and other experts say there’s little to support the claim. Study after study has shown that immigrants grow the economy, expanding demand for goods and services that the foreign-born workers and their families consume, and thereby creating jobs. There is even broad agreement among economists that while immigrants may push down wages for some, the overall effect is to increase average wages for American-born workers.

also:

But whether they’re legal, as in the CFAW ad, or illegal, as in our two other examples, really doesn’t matter for the purpose of answering our question: The truth is that immigrants don’t "take American jobs," according to most economists and others who have studied the issue.

Immigrant workers "create almost as many" jobs as they occupy, "and maybe more," said Madeleine Sumption, policy analyst at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, which is funded by a range of foundations, corporations and international organizations. "They often create the jobs they work in." In addition, "they buy things, and they make the economy bigger," she told us. As she and a co-author wrote in a report last year for a group created by the British government:

Somerville and Sumption: [T]he impact of immigration [on a nation's economy] remains small, for several reasons. Immigrants are not competitive in many types of jobs, and hence are not direct substitutes for natives. Local employers increase demand for low-skilled labor in areas that receive low-skilled immigrant inflows. Immigrants contribute to demand for goods and services that they consume, in turn increasing the demand for labor. And immigrants contribute to labor market efficiency and long-term economic growth.

Don't let Dell read this. His head might explode.

[Riot]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...090202673.html

Selected excerpts:

How illegal immigrants are helping Social Security

In response to a research inquiry for a book I am writing on the economics of immigration, Stephen C. Goss, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration and someone who enjoys bipartisan support for his straightforwardness, said that by 2007, the Social Security trust fund had received a net benefit of somewhere between $120 billion and $240 billion from unauthorized immigrants.

That represented an astounding 5.4 percent to 10.7 percent of the trust fund's total assets of $2.24 trillion that year. The cumulative contribution is surely higher now. Unauthorized immigrants paid a net contribution of $12 billion in 2007 alone, Goss said.

"If for example we had not had other-than-legal immigrants in the country over the past," Goss e-mailed me, "then these numbers suggest that we would have entered persistent shortfall of tax revenue to cover [payouts] starting [in] 2009, or six years earlier than estimated under the 2010 Trustees Report."

The Social Security actuaries estimate that two-thirds of unauthorized immigrant workers, or 5.6 million people, were paying into the system in 2007. Roughly half used a Social Security number tied to an invented name or one that belonged to someone else. Of the rest, many got legal cards when they entered the country under a temporary work visa. They stayed illegally after their visas expired.

About 180,000 unauthorized immigrants received about $1 billion in fraudulent benefits in 2007, Goss said. These benefits are subtracted from the net contribution. Few of the unauthorized workers are likely to receive anything, ever. About the only way they might would be if they were to become legal, and they had paid their withholding taxes using their true names.

The decline in illegal immigration, plus tighter workplace enforcement, means that contributions from the unauthorized will decrease. But as Goss notes, they remain, because of larger families, a positive contributing factor to Social Security solvency.

Somebody ought to say thank you.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...090202673.html

Selected excerpts:

Mr. Goss’s information is very informative if correct. Let’s take a look behind some of his numbers:

“In response to a research inquiry for a book I am writing on the economics of immigration, Stephen C. Goss, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration and someone who enjoys bipartisan support for his straightforwardness, said that by 2007, the Social Security trust fund had received a net benefit of somewhere between $120 billion and $240 billion from unauthorized immigrants.

That represented an astounding 5.4 percent to 10.7 percent of the trust fund's total assets of $2.24 trillion that year. The cumulative contribution is surely higher now. Unauthorized immigrants paid a net contribution of $12 billion in 2007 alone, Goss said.”

He went on with

”About 180,000 unauthorized immigrants received about $1 billion in fraudulent benefits in 2007, Goss said. These benefits are subtracted from the net contribution.”

So using Mr. Goss’s figures $13 billion were contributed to Social Security in 2007 by ‘unauthorized workers’ after adding back on the billion he subtracted for fraud. After using the 5.6 million worker number he quoted we arrive at an average contribution per worker of $2,321.00. Since the SS and Medicaid contribution is 7.65% of first 90K earned we learn that the average yearly wage for an illegal worker in 2007 was $30,539.00.

So now Mr. Goss has let the truth out. I would think there are 5.6 million American workers ready and willing to go to work today for 30K per year no matter how dirty the job. I'd also like to ask Mr. Goss the amount of children these ‘unauthorized workers’ have with them. If it averages out to anything more than a half child per worker the $2,321 contributed to SS is swallowed up in the first semester of school with a courtesy daily lunch. I'll let RIOT figure out the ER room health costs incurred and will leave out uninsured motor vehicle accidents, crime, etc etc etc.

Stephen Goss showed his bias throughout the piece using ‘unauthorized’ instead of illegal. To him someone robbing his neighbor’s house isn’t a home invader or burglar but an unauthorized visitor.

[Antitrust32]

I think you would have to base it at 12% for social security, not 6%.. Either you pay all 12% or your company matches your 6%...

so go with 12% if you are trying to figure out peoples salaries.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I think you would have to base it at 12% for social security, not 6%.. Either you pay all 12% or your company matches your 6%...

so go with 12% if you are trying to figure out peoples salaries.

Going with the 12% figure the average yearly pay per worker is reduced to $19,341.

I'm not sure Goss included the employers contribution? If he did then he should have added and their employers everytime he typed 'unauthorized immigrants' or reduced their total contribution by half.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Going with the 12% figure the average yearly pay per worker is reduced to $19,341.

I'm not sure Goss included the employers contribution? If he did then he should have added and their employers everytime he typed 'unauthorized immigrants' or reduced their total contribution by half.

it has to be 12% no matter what.

If that employee isnt working, the 6% match isnt coming in. If you are self employed you have to pay 12% anyway.

Plus 19k sounds a lot more like the salary of an illegal than 30k.