Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Improve the US Economy: Legalize unauthorized immigrants

In a report released last week, the Cato Institute calculates the benefits that would flow to the U.S. economy from a comprehensive immigration reform that grants legal status to unauthorized immigrants already living in the United States.

This study explains the implications for the U.S. economy of seven different policies toward illegal labor, ranging from increased enforcement at the border and in the workplace to the legalization of currently unauthorized immigrants and creation of legal channels for future immigrant workers that accommodate actual U.S. labor demand. It analyzes those seven stances using a tool developed for U.S. government commissions and agencies called the U.S. Applied General Equilibrium model. The report concludes that "compared to either border or interior enforcement, a policy of legalization would, over time, raise the incomes of U.S. workers and their families."

A program to grant legal status to unauthorized workers already in the United States, combined with new channels for the arrival of immigrant workers in the future, would increase the productivity of immigrant workers and create more job openings for American workers in higher-skilled occupations. The net result would be economic gains of roughly $180 billion over ten years.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, an enforcement-only approach would shrink the overall economy, reducing opportunities for higher-skilled American workers. The result of this approach is a significant negative impact on the income of U.S. households, netting economic losses of roughly $80 billion over ten years.

The US Congress is currently drafting comprehensive immigration reform proposals. Mary Giovagnoli, Director of the Immigration Policy Center, notes this report's timely relevance: "...the latest CATO report makes the essential point that reforming our broken immigration system by bringing unauthorized workers into our tax system and on the right side of the law will help our economy. Continuing our enforcement-only policies not only neglects the broken system, but will actually cost our economy billions of dollars over the next decade."

Immigrants bring value to America in their roles as workers, taxpayers and consumers. The data demonstrates that, simply from an economic perspective, legalizing the status of unauthorized immigrants is in the best interest of the US citizen.

FOR MORE INFORMATION: Restriction or Legalization? Measuring the Economic Benefits of Immigration Reform by Peter B. Dixon and Maureen T. Rimmer


enigma4ever said...

you always have such interesting articles..

I wish it was 10 years from now...and we were past this phase..

btw fb disabled me-
so I snuck back in....
I will friend you tomorrow....

take care...have hope..

Dave Dubya said...

I'm afraid that stands about as much, or less, a chance as legalization of cannabis.

But it is good to see the idea get out there.

Border Explorer said...

Enigma--thank you so much. That compliment means mucho coming from a blogging giant such as yourself!

I agree about the 10 years concept...but I don't need to be 10 years older, so can I just stay almost-60?

Sorry about fb. Don't know what their problem is. I love your friendship there.

Border Explorer said...

Dave, ha ha--I know what you mean, but then--Ronald Reagan granted amnesty in 1986, not so very long ago, so all bets are off as far as I'm concerned.

I don't think economics is a great basis for making a decision like that, but it's one important factor to consider.

What?? Cannabis won't be legalized?!? Say it isn't so!

Ruth Hull Chatlien said...

The American people don't seem to do very well taking a macreconomic view. People only see immigrants as threats to jobs, not as consumers, potential taxpayers, etc. It's a shame.

Vicente Duque said...

The Hispanic or Latino Race doesn't exist - The Anglo Saxon Race doesn't exist - The American White Race doesn't exist

It is obvious that the Hispanic or Latino Race doesn't exist, many people from the North of Spain immigrated in Latin America many centuries ago. They were blonde and blue eyed because of being descendants of the Germanic Visigoths and other Germanic or Gothic tribes that began to invade Spain in many waves of Germanic Barbarians when the Roman Empire started to crumble in year 376 of our Christian Era. They are collectively known as the Visigoths ....

But I think that these invasions didn't modify the basic paleolithic structure of Spanish Genetics.... The same way that the invaders of England ( Romans, Anglo Saxons, French Normans, etc ... ) didn't greatly modified the basic Genetic pool of England, much less the British Isles, or places like Scotland, Wales, the small British Islands or Ireland, where the "Celts" or paleolithics didn't suffer so much genetic influence from Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings or French Normans.

The Anglo Saxons seem to be in a great obscurity and there are some genetists that believe that there were many other Germanic Tribes involved, but anyway as in the case of Spain, they didn't modify the basic paleolithic Genetic Structure of the British Isles, not even England, and the "Anglo-Saxon" genes, if they exist are confined to North East England and are not the Greatest Proportion in that population. Some English Genetists have a lot of doubts about the "Anglo-Saxons", probably they were not so numerous ... You find more Information in this site RACIALITY.COM

The Chronicle of Idacius in Spain, which ends in 468, is filled with the description of the raids made by the barbarian Vandals, Sueves and Visigoths in Spanish Territory. Total Chaos of Germanic Barbarians fighting each another.

Strongly fortified cities, such as Cartagena, Merida, Seville, Astorga and Palencia were attacked and pillaged by the Germanic invaders. The churches in these places were often destroyed, the people put to death, or reduced to slavery. The Visigoths defeated of the Sueves in 456 and their gradual conquest of southern and eastern Spain.

In 454 at the request of the emperor Avitus, the Visigoths again invaded Spain and inflicted a decisive defeat upon the Bagaudae ( other Germanic Barbarians ) and two years later (456) upon the Sueves ( more Germanics or Goths ) near Astorga. Under Euric (466-483), the ablest of the Visigothic leaders in the fifth century, the whole of Spain, with the exception of Galicia, came under Gothic control. In 507 the Franks under Clovis defeated the Visigothic forces at the battle of Vouglé, and the youthful ruler, Alaric II, was slain on the field of battle. The Visigoths were thus driven into Spain and of their former possessions in France only Septimania remained.

Vicente Duque ( just and aficionado )

My Main Source
Wonderful Scholar Treatment of Germanic Barbarians in Spain :

Paganism and Pagan Survivals in Spain up to the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom
Stephen McKenna

Paganism and Pagan Survivals in Spain up to the Fall of the Visigothic Kingdom



Vicente Duque

Vicente Duque said...

Pat Buchanam, Superb Racist, History Revisionist, blames Poland for the Second World War, 70 years after Hitler's Coward Attack on that Nation

Pat Buchanam, MSNBC conservative commentator and former Republican presidential candidate. He has a History of Racist Comments and of being Number One Enemy for Minorities, Jews, etc ....

He happens to be Number One Racist preaching against Latinos and asking for a massive Progrom and Deportation of 12 million plus human beings. Some of those youngsters ( because they are very young ) don't know how to speak Spanish and know no other country but the USA.

Why is it that such a fine and intelligent lady as Rachel Maddow ( a person I love ) presents him in her show ???? ..... Pat Buchanam is the Lowest Scum of Racism.

Huffington Post
Aaron Keyak
Press Secretary, National Jewish Democratic Council
September 2, 2009

Why is Pat Buchanan Defending Hitler?


Some excerpts

Pat Buchanan has a history of insensitivity to issues surrounding the Holocaust. Yet again, with the 70th anniversary of the start of World War II, Buchanan posted a telling column on his own website and on Townhall that seems to blame Poland for World War II.

UPDATE: MSNBC is currently promoting Buchanan's column on MSNBC.com. This is beyond ridiculous. The National Jewish Democratic Council just issued a statement that says: "This sort of historical revisionism is deplorable. Buchanan's latest column should be removed immediately from MSNBC.com, and no worthy news organization should employ a commentator who engages in such vile fiction."

UPDATE II: Within an hour of our press release, MSNBC has removed Buchanan's column, "Did Hitler Want War," from their website. Here's a response from David A. Harris, NJDC's President: "MSNBC took the responsible action and removed Pat Buchanan's column defending Adolf Hitler from their website, but no worthy news organization should employ and promote a commentator who engages in such vile fiction."


Vicente Duque

MikeFrizzi said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.