New wife associating with illegal immigrants

[soltero]

... in response to Bring your request,....., posted by Hoda on Oct 15, 2004

Thanks Hoda, but it's ok. I guess the few that had anything to really add did it, and then the thread went the way of general conversation. I have been here long enough to see this happen more than once. You have to just get what useful info you can and then sit back and enjoy the show as the intellectuals who really don't have a clue or any experience with the subject spin it into something they can keep going.

[Brazilophile]

... in response to Why must he be kidding?, posted by fencer on Oct 14, 2004

"I don’t get why these matters are beyond the pale of discussion as you imply by your outraged response."

They are not beyond the pale of discussion, but we should be discussing them intelligently and with true, complete,  and accurate facts.

One fact that you have left out that radically changes your analysis is that these illegals have to pay money and take on risk to get to the US.  Therefore, Mexicans have a decision to make; is the money I expect to make in the US worth the cost and risk of getting there.  The ones who answer "YES!!!" are the more dynamic and hardworking Mexicans, not the losers and dregs you describe them to be.

This fact has led to a theory of immigration in academia.  The reseachers who went about trying to disprove that theory found that 10 years after entering the US, immigrants were earning MORE money than comparable native American citizens.  

The one caveat I will allow you is that this research is based mostly on LEGAL migration.  The research on illegal migration is scant because illegals won't participate in those types of academic research projects.

[fencer]

... in response to Re: Why must he be kidding?, posted by Brazilophile on Oct 14, 2004

[This message has been edited by fencer]

Heck I think I owe you a beer for reading to the end!

But...

An illegal earning 30 cents an hour in Mexico probably doesn't have the wherewithal to pay the $10-$50K for the coyote to smuggle him across the border. The money most likely comes from a relative already working illegally in the US paying for a spouse or close relative to come over.

The smugglers also loan the transit fees to the illegals. The illegals are basically in debt bondage to the smugglers and pay off the money over time as a cut of the illegals wages. They get a big cut. This incidentally strengthens the hand of organized crime in the US and amounts to the US authorities tolerating indentured servitude. Pretty ugly. And it bespeaks more of desperation than dynamism.

But even if illegals are well served coming to the US. How is the US better off over all?

You are perfectly free to cite your "true, complete, and accurate facts."

Here's a quote from George Borjas of Harvard and a leading researcher on labor market economics (and also the son of Cuban immigrants).

" For instance, the predicted lifetime earnings of immigrants from Canada, Germany or Britain are about 20% higher than those of natives; immigrants from India or Korea earn about 7% less than natives; and immigrants from the Dominican Republic, Jamaica or Mexico earn 30% to 40% less than natives. " WSJ 1990

http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~GBorjas/Papers/WSJ040590.htm

Unskilled immigration is pushing down wages for the American working poor. Maybe you'd discuss that as part of your goal of "discussing [the issues] intelligently."

I agree Reed's views are pretty strong but he probably knows something about Mexico. He does live there and he actually prefers Mexico to the US. He has a lot of nice things to say about it.

[Brazilophile]

... in response to Re: Re: Why must he be kidding?, posted by fencer on Oct 14, 2004

George Borjas is one of the academics I was getting my information from.  He developed the theory of selection in immigration composition.

Your comments on the payments to the facilitators of illegal immigration are correct but irrelevant.  The key point is that those payments represent a hurdle illegals must decide to surmount in coming to the US.  Those who feel they can't surmount those hurdles DO NOT COME TO THE US!!!  If those migrants who believe they can successfully surmount the cost and risk hurdles to come to the US are also the most industrious, resilient, persistent, and capable then the US benefits from an increase in the quality of its labor force.  

I have only anecdotal evidfence on this issue.  I have heard several stories of how the owners of small construction firms in the southwest refuse to hire Americans because they don't work hard enough.  The owners have become spoiled by hard working, reliable Mexicans.  Yes, unskilled Americans face greater unemployment and lower wages as a result.  American consumers get lower cost housing.

[Locii]

... in response to Re: Re: Why must he be kidding?, posted by fencer on Oct 14, 2004

At the risk of stating an argument that seems stupid on the surface, let me propose this:

If I am not mistaken, when you made the statement "Unskilled immigration is pushing down wages for the American working poor.", you infer that to be negative.  Why?  Perhaps its ugly, perhaps its painful...but driving down a wage scale in that way is merely a function of a (freer) market.

Illegal immigration is part of the grey economy, or informal economy.  It is a natural, if misguided, instinct among human beings to feel threatened by an informal economy.  But an informal economy, wherever and whenever it exists, comes into existence out of a natural (and therefore pointlessly resisted) confrontation of supply and demand.

In soviet russia, there was an informal economy for toilet paper and heating fuels; they came into existence because the gov't had manipulated the formal systems into oblivion.

In the US, the informal economies which get the most attention are drugs, prostitution and illegal immigration (and employment).  One can moralize and rationalize the behaviors in and around these to infinity, and shake one's fists at the moon, but the fact is that the survivability of a society depends upon the adaptivity of it to the pressures of its informal economies.

What does this have to do with unskilled wages?  Everything.  The unskilled (even uneducated) person will happily travel across half the world and happily break rules and laws for these opportunities.  Until the wages are driven down to where it no longer is an opportunity.  The alternative is to raise the wages everywhere else.  Even the uneducated person knows better than to wait for that.

So one can wag his/her finger at prostitutes, and one can shake her/his fists at illegal aliens, but these things exist  as evidence of a breaking or broken system.  You can count on the informal economy, with its shady characters, to fill any demand, anywhere, at any time, for the right price.  The solution is to regulate (versus ban) all of these activities.

Ciao

[fencer]

... in response to Re: Re: Re: Why must he be kidding?, posted by Locii on Oct 14, 2004

“Perhaps its ugly, perhaps its painful...but driving down a wage scale in that way is merely a function of a (freer) market.”

Fair enough. Of course it’s not your ox getting gored. If the 30% that is the working poor don’t notice they are getting the shaft as is happening currently then maybe they deserve what they get. This can go on indefinitely until they wake up politically. But I think they are going to wake up soon and I doubt if your value system of so called free markets will hold much water with them. I hope not.

Americans scoff at Europeans for their socialized economies but the US economy is just as socialist except here we steal from the poor and give to the rich. Congress this week passed a massive tax break for corporations without in anyway cutting spending and reducing yours and my tax liabilities. The medical drug benefit program approved by Bush increased yours and my taxes without imposing any restraint on prices drug companies can charge even though us taxpayers are the source of all their moolah. From my pocket into the drug companies’ in 2 steps. Both are examples of wealth transfer from the poor to the rich.

Illegal (and legal) immigration is just another wealth transfer scheme from poor Americans who take the reduced wages with the benefits going to the rich. Walmart hiring cut rate cleaning crews at its stores certainly adds the the Walton families mega billion dollar fortunes and puts plenty of money into the pockets of the brokers who contract the crews knowing full well they are dealing with illegals. This activity could be stopped immediately but it goes on with the connivance of the authorities who turn a blind eye at the behest of private interests. We have a hard libertarian laissez-faire system for the $7/hr wage earners and socialism for the Walton dynasties of the US who get the true costs of this labor (medicine, education, strained infrastructure, busted state budgets) subsidized by the very same poor Americans. Where’s the free market in any of this.

“But an informal economy, wherever and whenever it exists, comes into existence out of a natural (and therefore pointlessly resisted) confrontation of supply and demand.”

The growth of this illegal and informal economy has a lot of causes. Relevantly the Federal Reserve creating massive liquidity in the financial system and resulting bubbles. We’ve had 1% interest rates (below inflation; that is, stealing money from savers) that have fueled a massive housing bubble, including a bubble in new home construction. The bubble could have been spiked if, for example, construction wages had increased instead we get massive hiring of illegal construction crews driving down American wages. This demand for this illegal labor has been fraudulently generated by the Federal Reserve.

The easy money has incited massive refi’s and plain overconsumption by Americans. We take out equity from our homes and spend the money in cheap restaurants or drugs or prostitution or whatever (aka the informal economy) that hire illegals. Or we  spend the excess liquidity at Walmart who keep their goods artificially low, thereby undercutting and bankrupting legitimate small business owners, by hiring illegal work crews. Hey! More socialism for the wealthy.

The Feds are the ones stoking the demand for illegals. The demand is artificial and created by loose money. The perverse consequence, being driven by the capitalists, is the driving down of American wages and the US standard of living. Again more socialism for the wealthy, in this case the bankers who get the first swipe at the newly printed money (and get to loan it to us at 5% mortgage rates or 18% credit card rates while only paying us 1% in the bank – thanks, Mr. Bubbles Greenspan).

So comparisons with Soviet systems notwithstanding the distortions in our system have been created by good ol’ American bankers.

[And just to make this slightly relevant to Planet Love get ready for a massive nosedive in the value of the dollar which will seriously impact anyone going abroad to look for a wife. ]

“but the fact is that the survivability of a society depends upon the adaptivity of it to the pressures of its informal economies. “.

Somehow I don’t think the survivability of our society will depend on ever running out of unskilled labor. What is happening is the informal economy is forcing American citizen’s into the Hobson’s choice of not reporting income to the authorities just to survive on reduced wages. Not to sound too apocalyptic about it but a state that makes honest people become lawbreakers is a failing state.

[Locii]

... in response to free market socialism for the wealthy, posted by fencer on Oct 15, 2004

I don't remember disclosing any details about my ox, and I'm not sure what you mean by saying that...

You seem to be under the notion that if poorer people 'politically wake up', they will be better off.  I don't see how.  You sound like you read a bit, so read about how LBJ's War on Poverty and the programs that came with it coincided perfectly the the apogee of middle class wealth rise.  Middle class standards of living and wages relative to cost of living have dropped since about 1970.

I totally agree with you about the liquidity bubble that has been created, to a large extent by the Fed.  There are good reasons that they started it, the world currency crisis of seven years ago was the first leg, and the failure of LTCM was a good indication of the magnitude of what was occurring.  The stock market bubble of 1998-2000 was a direct function of excess liquidity needing to find a home; then it fled stocks and has inflated housing prices.

The funny part of your post, though, is this:
"the distortions in our system have been created by good ol’ American bankers."

Well done, you are totally correct.  Now, tell me what political party bankers fall into, lock, stock and barrel?  Democrats.  People seem so stunned by this knowledge when they first receive it.  Democrats wander around talking about how 'big business' is where Republicans get their money.  Its true.  But look at who is funding the Democrats:  The Trial Lawyers Association and Bankers and Insurers.  Go ask the Oracle of Omaha, Mr. Buffet, what his political leanings are.

Its called croney capitalism.  It turns out that bankers and insurers just *LOVE* regulations which require their services, while energy companies (among others) are hamstrung by regulations.  The reason this country is so dependent on foriegn energy is because regulation keeps it too expensive or limits it outright.

Bill Clinton's man Robert Rubin...where did he come from?  Goldman Sachs. Want to read the story, now, that economic historians will be teaching our kids someday about what went wrong with Clinton and Rubin's miracle?  Here you go:
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/columnists/dwaynehines/article41.html

You might be correct about the dollar falling, but the South American currencies might move more with it (than, say the euro) since many of those economies are tied much closer you our own, but also because of the large amount of dollar reserves they keep.

I also totally agree with your closing statements.  While I am hardly a paranoid person, the number of laws affecting the minutia of living behavior, from how to park your car, to where to smoke, to where to place your doormat, is rising exponentially.  Its called the nanny state, and its why LA becons to me.

Ciao

[Brazilophile]

... in response to free market socialism for the wealthy, posted by fencer on Oct 15, 2004

Fencer,

In your recent posts, you have discussed several fairly advanced economic concepts and cited an academic well-known only to demographers and economists.  

What is your training and/or experience in economics?

[fencer]

... in response to Re: free market socialism for the wealth..., posted by Brazilophile on Oct 15, 2004

Borjas has written in The Atlantic Monthly if I recall.

Some programmers develop an interest in employment matters beyond the usual through the issue of H1B and L1 visas.

The problems regarding excess liquidity is being written about a lot on the "bear" financial websites: prudentbear.com; financialsense.com etc. It seems like there's a lot of unwelcome changes brewing in the economy which will hurt anyone going South if the problems come to pass.

[Heat]

... in response to free market socialism for the wealthy, posted by fencer on Oct 15, 2004

Man you sound like a socialist.

[Hoda]

... in response to Those evil rich people, posted by Heat on Oct 15, 2004

[This message has been edited by Hoda]

but you have to give the man his "props" for the way he presented his argument. It's kool, if you don't share his views, but you'll need to come back stronger than just calling him a "socialist" in order to counter his argument.

[Heat]

... in response to Heat, you may not agree with Fencer's co..., posted by Hoda on Oct 15, 2004

Hoda,

I would love to respond to all this crap.  But man I live in Cali Colombia.   I got fish to fry.  Ya know what I mean brother!!!