It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Immoral Argument: Illegals Improve Our Economy

page: 2
39
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan


Sadly, you're not going to get the quality responses deserving of your post.
4

Thanks for the compliment, but I hope you are wrong. It is a complex issues that deserves to be discussed.



I want to point out though that you missed one part of the economic argument. Many illegals come here and send money home taking advantage of the difference in the value of currencies. This is true of South/Central Americans that work the fields, and it's true of the Asians (an even bigger demographic) who are sending money to China, Vietnam, Cambodia, and so on.

What would cost a farmer $25/hour to give to a citizen (and in fact, people have proven that $25/hour is not enough to get substantial numbers into working agriculture), an illegal can live humbly in a 1 bedroom apartment with a couple other illegals in the US, send enough home to give their families a $75/hour lifestyle, and even visit home from time to time in the off season... while costing the farmer just $7/hour. In some countries the advantage from converting currencies between different economic zones is even larger.


I agree this is a problem. However, the costs you are talking about below would be at least partially offset by keeping this money in the US. Lets take the moderate estimate of 11 million illegals in the US. If most of them are sending money home, that could be Billions of dollars a year. This is money that could be kept in the states.


This is the problem with the economic argument. Sure we could kick out the illegals, give our citizens $30/hour jobs (maybe even higher), and raise the cost of food to compensate but we also import food and that imported food doesn't have our labor costs attached to it. We could fix this with tariff's but that's only part of the issue. We also export food... a lot of food, and we would have to attach our labor costs to that as well which is an issue that we can't tariff our way out of, people simply won't buy the product.


So in the end, if we kick out the illegals we also have to be willing to be willing to give up our second most valuable export (next to oil), we have to destroy a whole bunch of trade deals (and the attached benefits we get for those deals), and we have to be willing to accept much higher food prices.

That is a lot to ask. How are our farmers going to react when they're only able to produce half as much produce per year because the government refuses to sign trade deals that open the doors to them producing at full capacity? How would you feel if the government imposed rules on your industry that halved the amount of product your company can sell?

Lastly, if you did the math on this, it means we create a bunch of $60k/year agriculture jobs but our median wage if $52k. That means there's going to be a lot of people bringing in $15k-$40k per year who will suddenly have to absorb exorbitant increases on the price of food. That will lead to a lot of instability, and ultimately backdoor more government farm subsidies in the form of food stamps. This is already a problem where we're effectively paying farmers to not grow food, such a change would multiply this problem by several times, both directly (because we're reducing what farmers can grow and sell) and indirectly in giving people money to buy food.


I think you are massively overestimating how much we would have to pay people to do these jobs. I honestly hardly know anyone that makes close to $30 an hour, this seems like an extremely high wage. I think the wage would be at least half of that to get people interested in the work. And here is the thing, markets force people to innovate. The farm land in the US wouldn't just dry up. These farmers would find ways of balancing the wage increase while still being competitive in the market. This means that free trade wouldn't necessarily have to be given up.

You are also assuming that illegal immigrants make up the majority of the agricultural sector, and I don't know if that is true. In addition, we already have subsidies on many agricultural products, and we haven't seen the disaster you speak of. Another thing is countries need food, and despite what we do with trade deals, there will always be a market for our farmers.

Even if all of what you say is true, it is still immoral. To allow the abuse of these illegals for economic benefit is not a moral position. Again, if someone wants to make that argument, I am fine with it, but I will not let them accuse people who want to deport illegals as somehow being less moral.




posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


However, the costs you are talking about below would be at least partially offset by keeping this money in the US. Lets take the moderate estimate of 11 million illegals in the US. If most of them are sending money home, that could be Billions of dollars a year.


I don't have an exact figure, but I've seen it estimated that Mexico gets upwards of a 25% of its revenue sent back from the US each year.

Certainly whatever the figure is, it is significant enough that we know Mexico is complicit in encouraging its citizens to come to the US illegally. The wouldn't do that unless it was somehow advantageous to them as a nation.

Back in the days of Eisenhower, Operation Wetback was successful in large part because Mexico cooperated, and Mexico cooperated because it was not to their advantage to have so many of their own living illegally in the US. Simply put, they wanted those citizens back then; they don't necessarily today because it benefits the country to have them here. The only reason I can think for that is because of the substantial amount of cash those citizens send back home.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

The argument is as follows; illegals are good for the economy because they take jobs Americans won't take, and drive the price of products down because they work cheap.

This is immoral because it is focused on making the self comfortable at the expense of hard working illegals.

You are making a different argument, you think illegals should be payed a much higher wage. Therefore, you are not making the immoral argument I was discussing.

However, there are problems with your approach, which I mentioned in the first post. The first thing that does is take away any economic argument that can be made about illegals, because they are no longer working at a cheaper wage.

I will copy the rest from my first post.

Secondly, if these businesses do survive then, this proves they could have paid American workers a competitive wage and they could have had the, which means the economy would have been even better without the illegals.

Thirdly, this would be a sign to the rest of the world to massively illegally immigrate to the US, because there is no more border. And even if you could get passed all of that, the fact is these new highly paid illegals would still have unfairly passed up people that tried to do things the right way and come here legally, and make it far less likely that those people could get in.

I am not disagreeing with you in that many illegals work very hard. My point is that exploiting them for cheap labor and the arguing they improve the economy is immoral. As outlined in my initial post, these jobs would be better going to increased wages for American citizens and legal immigrants.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Luckily we have a real life example of what happens to wages when illegals are shunned in a state. That state is Arizona. Wages for low skill jobs increased rapidly for construction, farm workers and landscaping.
Farms bought labor saving equipment(capital) instead of using cheap labor and eliminated lots labor cost.

As for the price of watermelons or peaches, really who cares. These foods are in no way essential. We buy most fruits for enjoyment, just as we buy chocolate.

Corn, wheat and potatoes are the bulk of our foodstuffs. They need very little in the way of labor compared to fruit and veggie picking. The foodstuff price hike scare is a joke.
The farmers around me harvest their corn and wheat with no illegals and compete in the market.

Illegal immigration may help to destroy family farming where the mega farm can use that cost saving to quickly acquire more land and squeeze out the small farmer who has a bad year.

The worst part may actually be that the US takes the cream of the crop of immigrants, the smartest, the hardest working, the most ambitious. Those who could fix their own country. Leaving the home country worse off.

TL
R illegal immigration depresses wages, fact.
edit on 1-9-2016 by jellyrev because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Humans have migrated since before we have written words, there will never be a stop to people moving to a different part of the world, people act like they invented this illegal immigration crap, the more walls we build between each other the more people will break them down.


So I assume this is an argument for no borders then right? I mean, if people will always immigrate, why even try to control a border. This would be anarchy.

Since we are discussing history, name me one country that ever survived with completely open borders.

I am not claiming that we invented illegal immigration, clearly it has been going on for all of history. And for all of history, people respected the idea that countries had the right to enforce their borders. You are the one bucking the trend of history.

On a side note, since the beginning of time people have murdered, so why make it illegal and enforce laws against it? The more laws we make, the more they will be tore down, right?



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
I agree this is a problem. However, the costs you are talking about below would be at least partially offset by keeping this money in the US. Lets take the moderate estimate of 11 million illegals in the US. If most of them are sending money home, that could be Billions of dollars a year. This is money that could be kept in the states.


Keeping the money in the US doesn't matter very much, we're not in the old days anymore where there's a finite money supply such as when we were on the gold standard. Back then, a dollar leaving the country meant that was 1 fewer dollar our citizens could have. But today with leverage rates, fiat currency, and lending schemes that are so complex the brightest minds on the planet can't understand them... currency is effectively infinite. The supply matters very little, so it doesn't matter where the money goes. The only thing that really matters is the demand. In a way, sending currency out of the country is even beneficial because it increases the potential sources for demand which in turn gives our currency value.


I think you are massively overestimating how much we would have to pay people to do these jobs. I honestly hardly know anyone that makes close to $30 an hour, this seems like an extremely high wage. I think the wage would be at least half of that to get people interested in the work. And here is the thing, markets force people to innovate. The farm land in the US wouldn't just dry up. These farmers would find ways of balancing the wage increase while still being competitive in the market. This means that free trade wouldn't necessarily have to be given up.


If anything I'm low balling what these jobs would demand as a market wage. A few years back Alabama (with the cooperation and advice of their farm industry) drafted legislation that made it virtually impossible to hire illegals. To everyones surprise, the legislation actually worked. At the time, the farmers were offering $25/hour to virtually anyone to come in and pick crops and with a years notice to line up workers, disaster struck. The food rotted in the fields until the state trucked in conscripted prison labor to harvest it as an emergency measure. The legislation was repealed shortly after that.

$25/hour wasn't enough. Given the aversion most people in the US have to hot, dirty work (such as looking at the steel mills) wages of $30/hr can't get enough applicants in the door, and get them to stay. Then you have the demand aspect to consider, there's currently little pressure to fill our unpleasant jobs currently, but there's a large need with agriculture. This also leads to an employee's market which in turn raises wages. The farms are going to have to offer a lot of money to get people on board.



You are also assuming that illegal immigrants make up the majority of the agricultural sector, and I don't know if that is true. In addition, we already have subsidies on many agricultural products, and we haven't seen the disaster you speak of. Another thing is countries need food, and despite what we do with trade deals, there will always be a market for our farmers.


If Alabama is any indication, they make up the vast majority. I don't know the exact percentages but I've read of instances in that states experiment with illegal free farming that some farms lost over 90% of their employees.


Even if all of what you say is true, it is still immoral. To allow the abuse of these illegals for economic benefit is not a moral position. Again, if someone wants to make that argument, I am fine with it, but I will not let them accuse people who want to deport illegals as somehow being less moral.


I would love to get rid of illegals on moral grounds. I think it's very bad for society to have an underclass that is denied advancement, rights, basic services, and is forced to exist in fear. It leads to a group that is very easy to exploit. The eventual solution to that is probably some combination of deterrence, deportation, and amnesty. However, as things currently stand our agriculture industry is completely reliant on illegal labor practices. That needs to be fixed, but there's a price attached to doing so.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler


These workers are unique in that they do not have the bargaining power of an average legal worker. A legal worker can say if I don't like the wage, I will go else where. Illegals can't really say that, because the businesses own the monopoly of where the can work. This destroys free market principals, and forces these illegals to live in poverty. So in a way they are forced to take these jobs, or starve or leave.


Illegals have been coming here for many, many years. The ones who are here communicate and send money back to the ones still in Mexico. Everyone there is well aware of what they are going to be paid here. There are no surprises for them once they get here.




This was answered in my first post, but here is the short version. One, maybe they used all of their resources to get here, so they can't leave. Second, many of them may still be holding out hope for becoming citizens or their wage increasing.


If they want to go back so bad, all they have to do is turn themselves in. They get deported at no cost to themselves. As for holding out hope, again, they have been doing this for a long time. They know what the reality is. My main point was that you are incorrect to compare them to slaves. Totally different situation.



All of your points here prove the selfish nature of of the economic argument. They aren't forced to work, they can leave if they want. Again, you are inadvertently legitimizing several arguments that the liberals hate.

Woman in an abusive relationship? She could leave if she wanted.

Poor person living in a ghetto? You could leave if you wanted.


Comparing the psychological damage done to a woman in an abusive relationship to someone coming here to make a living is pretty disingenuous.

Where is a poor person in a ghetto supposed to go to make more money? Mexico??? At least in the ghetto there is running water and toilets that actually flush. People who come from the poorest parts of Mexico think they're living the high life when they get to the ghetto.


But that was answered above, paying these illegals a fair wage proves that Americans would be willing to do the job and could, is unfair to people waiting to be legal immigrants, and would lead to an incredible increase in the amount of illegals trying to get here and get those benefits. It also eliminates any argument you could make as to why illegals benefit the economy.


The illegal situation as it is currently DOES benefit the economy. It also benefits the illegals, as they now have money to help their families, where they didn't before. I was just saying I could handle the hit to the economy - but not everyone will be able to.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I dont think there are any jobs americans wouldnt do. I have nothing against the illegals as people but i feel unemployment wouldnt be so high if they were deported.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

On the first part, I disagree with you about fiat currency making illegals sending wealth out of the country not a problem. They are sending the fruits of their labor out of the country. This means that the cycle of capitalism has less value in it, because it is being sent out of the country. Fiat currency can devalue the dollar because more of it can be printed, but forget about the dollar amount. What is important is that a large percentage of the money in the country is being shipped out.

If your argument was true, then we would have incentive to purposefully print money and just send it over seas for no reason. This would in turn increase demand as you say, making our currency even more valuable. Clearly this isn't the case.

Look at in on a town level. People come into a town to work, but never spend any money there. Would that town thrive because fiat currency? No, it would die because no wealth was being spent there. The same is true on a national level. Every dollar sent over seas is a dollar the US businesses do not get. If legal workers had this money and spent it here, it would increase sales for many other products.

As far as people still not accepting jobs at $25 and hour maybe you are right. I worked on a Christmas tree farm about 15 years ago for $6.50 an hour. It sucked, but I was a teenager and needed money. The industry will develop technologies that can do the work easier if people won't take the jobs. Also, maybe we should end the welfare system that makes people feel entitled to not have to work for a living.

Again, every argument you make here was made about ending slavery. It would kill ag, it would raise food prices, our economy would collapse. Yet none of this was a reason to keep slaves, and neither is it a reason to keep illegals now. Just like when we ended slavery, we will carry on and be fine.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Or these farmers could have you know picked another crop to farm, they do not seem that high into specific high capital equipment if they are still hand picking their product. I suppose I am used to the midwest where crops cycle in the fields and illegal labor is sparse except for cow milking.

If berries are expensive, who cares, Ill not buy berries. In actuality the berry field will likely be turned into a field where more calories produced per acre, such as wheat, corn, potatoes. If this strawberry to wheat field conversion happened en masse the average calorie cost would likely decrease not increase.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I would have to ask you if you are opposed to the concept of foreign aid?

Think about it this way:

The illegal immigrants who work here and then send a large part of their wages home are basically engaged in a form of foreign aid.

It is simply a different method then the government taxing away American workers' wages and sending those to various foreign nations to be used as those countries see fit.

So, and I honestly cannot recall your position on this, if you are opposed to the one, you ought to be opposed to the other.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: neveroddoreven99
As productivity goes up so did workers wages, well til 1979. The problem is the massive productivity gains since have been diverted to the 1%. Do 5 minutes of research, this may very well be one major reason we are where we are.



Trickle down economics was a myth.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I'd like to add to the OP...

Those jobs that illegals do hat Americans don't want? That's a load of $H;! Meaning they have taken over many skilled labor jobs and entire sectors of jobs that Americans DO want.

Go on any construction site in Florida and you will see MOSTLY Hispanics working. I know for a fact most of those Hispanics are illegal because I am friends with lots of them and they tell me everything. They all know each other and I know many many of them so I'm speaking from first hand experience.

Here is a list of good jobs that used to pay well but now pay $H;7 wages because of how the illegals drove down the wages.

What the normal starting pay should be will be labeled NSP(normal starting pay) what it is at this time will be labled ASP(actual starting pay). Also I'll give a rough estimate of what the normal pay rate is supposed to be after like 5 years experience NPR(normal pay rate) and also what the pay rate actually is at the moment APR(actual pay rate).

This will give you guys a good idea of the real impact this situation has had on this industry and in turn the millions of Americans it has brought from middle class to the poor and even impoverished class.

Painting: NSP $13/hr ASP $8-9/hr NPR $25/hr APR $15/hr

Plumbing: NSP $15/hr ASP $9/hr NPR $30/hr APR $17-19/hr

Stucco : NSP $120/day ASP $80/day NPR $220/day APR $150/day

Carpentry: NSP $15/hr ASP $9/hr NPR $30 APR $17-19/hr

Concrete: NSP $12/hr ASP $8.50/hr NPR $24/hr APR $16-17/hr

Almost every other labor trade has been affected the same way. These are Florida pay rates and it will vary from state to state. Florida has crap wages as it is anyways let alone the affect of the illegals. I'm sure although the rates may be different the impact all over the country is very similar.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

Illegals have been coming here for many, many years. The ones who are here communicate and send money back to the ones still in Mexico. Everyone there is well aware of what they are going to be paid here. There are no surprises for them once they get here.


Again, I just want to clarify, you have given up any right to ever make a minimum wage argument again, you do realize that right? If someone chooses to work for a wage no one is forcing them.

Ok. Secondly


It is estimated that 17,000 to 19,0001 foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States each year. Trafficking is the recruitment and possible transport of persons within or across boundaries by force, fraud, or deception for the purpose of exploiting them economically. Victims are lured with false promises of good jobs and better lives, and then forced to work under brutal and inhuman conditions. Victims of trafficking are exploited for purposes of commercial sex, including prostitution, stripping, pornography live-sex shows and other acts. However, trafficking also takes place as labor exploitation, including domestic servitude, sweatshop factories, agricultural work and more. After drug dealing, human trafficking is tied with the illegal arms industry as the second largest criminal industry in the world today, and it is the fastest growing.

www.fairus.org...

So they are promised things that they don't receive. This happens all of the time.



If they want to go back so bad, all they have to do is turn themselves in. They get deported at no cost to themselves. As for holding out hope, again, they have been doing this for a long time. They know what the reality is. My main point was that you are incorrect to compare them to slaves. Totally different situation.


Many are misled as I mentioned above.




Comparing the psychological damage done to a woman in an abusive relationship to someone coming here to make a living is pretty disingenuous.

Where is a poor person in a ghetto supposed to go to make more money? Mexico??? At least in the ghetto there is running water and toilets that actually flush. People who come from the poorest parts of Mexico think they're living the high life when they get to the ghetto.


So you don't think working in these brutal conditions is psychological damage? Ok fine. Then how about comparing it to prostitution. I woman that is forced to sell herself to feed her family, even though she hates it. But hey, if she dislikes it too much, she can just quit right?

As far as where can people in the ghetto go, um rural areas, suburban areas, any where that isn't the ghetto. I live in rural PA, ton's of shops have help wanted signs up, and I make $14 an hour and live comfortably. So you are still legutimizing the argument that if they could find a place to move, its their own fault for being stuck in a ghetto.

And can't you see how crass you are being to illegals? "Hey, you are going to work for next to nothing. If you don't like it, hit the bricks!".



The illegal situation as it is currently DOES benefit the economy. It also benefits the illegals, as they now have money to help their families, where they didn't before. I was just saying I could handle the hit to the economy - but not everyone will be able to.


So you are again making the argument that these people need to suffer for the benefit of our economy.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I hate to be OT, but I am massively confused.

The Eddy Fitz was an ore carrier on the Great Lakes.

I wasn't aware they even had "chamber maids" for the crew.

Why would she have "come over" from Canada on a boat when she could have driven or even walked?



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Human trafficking is a completely different topic than the undocumented immigrant topic - way to move the goal posts there.

Sending them back to Mexico is making them suffer a lot worse just so we don't have to see them in our cities and neighborhoods. They keep coming here because it is better for them and their families than it is there. That is a fact.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Grambler

Human trafficking is a completely different topic than the undocumented immigrant topic - way to move the goal posts there.

Sending them back to Mexico is making them suffer a lot worse just so we don't have to see them in our cities and neighborhoods. They keep coming here because it is better for them and their families than it is there. That is a fact.


No, human trafficking is not a completely different topic. How do you think so many of the illegals get here? They are trafficked.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I cannot let this stand.

Alabama's HB56 law did not fail. It was gutted by the Federal government. It worked perfectly until that. Unemployment was down and small farms were showing record profits.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

What are you talking about? The article is using the term trafficed to mean illegals brought in. It says some are forced, other are promised good jobs, etc. THESE ARE ILLEGALS THAT ARE HERE!!!! Where do you think the 19000 trafficked a year into the US go? The become illegals! many are forced to work low paying jobs. This is exactly the people we are talking about.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Christosterone

But humans are people too.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join