Political Roundtable Part VIII

[nate33]

Your numbers are an order of magnitude off base. More like 1 guard per mile, or a 5-guard station every 10 miles. And this is all within the context of the absurdly high cost of illegal immigration. Estimates are that Illegal immigration costs the American taxpayer a whopping $113 billion per year! Believe me, the Wall will be a financial benefit.

And you say my numbers are way off base...

These numbers, sir, came directly from your butt.

And the study you cite is a crock. We discussed this last time. No estimate of the "costs" of illegal immigration is legitimate if all it does is take a snapshot of the costs at one given moment, rather than properly taking into account the immigrants' increasing tax contribution over time and over generations as their education and earnings rise. Lifetime earnings potential is elementary economics taught in introductory macro classes. Nowadays they probably teach this in high school.

My hypothesis is that incumbent Americans are lazy idjits and the incoming immigrants are actually more innately talented, on average, than us. Bringing their families in injects talent into an otherwise decaying stock of human capital and makes us better off in the long run (over a generation or so).

I've already posted numbers on multiple occasions that show that even the 2nd and 3rd generation of low skill immigrants are not positive contributors to the tax base (meaning they cost more than they pay). The first generation is generally a bit better than the original immigrants, but still a net drain. The second generation regresses from there.

You constantly dispute my facts, but never ever post any links or data.

[nate33]

College educated Republicans support Trump, but they're afraid to admit it publicly.

This could snowball if Trump ever gets over the credibility wall that the GOP Establishment and liberal media are trying to erect. There's a lot of people out there who can't help but acknowledge that the stuff Trump is saying makes a lot of sense. They're just worried about losing standing among their peers if they admit it.

This brings to mind the famous quote from a Manhattan socialite: "How could McGovern lose? Everyone I know voted for him."

he also has a 60% national unfavorable rating, if that's not a record for a first time non-politician candidate, its close.

It's more like 55%, but your point is well taken.

The question is, how many Republicans who are currently have an unfavorable impression will "hold their nose" and vote for him in the general election after he wins the primary.

[crackhed]

College educated Republicans support Trump, but they're afraid to admit it publicly.

This could snowball if Trump ever gets over the credibility wall that the GOP Establishment and liberal media are trying to erect. There's a lot of people out there who can't help but acknowledge that the stuff Trump is saying makes a lot of sense. They're just worried about losing standing among their peers if they admit it.

This brings to mind the famous quote from a Manhattan socialite: "How could McGovern lose? Everyone I know voted for him."

he also has a 60% national unfavorable rating, if that's not a record for a first time non-politician candidate, its close.

It's more like 55%, but your point is well taken.

The question is, how many Republicans who are currently have an unfavorable impression will "hold their nose" and vote for him in the general election after he wins the primary.

republicans have enough trouble winning purple states with moderately inclusive candidates let alone a sexist bigot. best of luck, i can certainly see how excited you are

[nate33]

UK Central Bank Report CONFIRMS Immigration Leads To Lower Wages

The Report states clearly that a ’10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services leads to a 1.88 percent reduction in pay’. Government net migration numbers of over 300,000 annually, together with those that are not captured in official figures, is preventing wages rising in line with inflation for native, British workers, noticeable at the lower end of the skills classification scale. But the ‘knock on’ effects of this many outsiders entering the UK workforce impacts the disposable incomes of workers across the social spectrum and, with technological advances, hinders employment opportunities for British people.

[nate33]

he also has a 60% national unfavorable rating, if that's not a record for a first time non-politician candidate, its close.

It's more like 55%, but your point is well taken.

The question is, how many Republicans who are currently have an unfavorable impression will "hold their nose" and vote for him in the general election after he wins the primary.

republicans have enough trouble winning purple states with moderately inclusive candidates let alone a sexist bigot. best of luck, i can certainly see how excited you are

Every time I get insulted despite being perfectly civil in my posts, I know I am winning the argument.

[TGW]

UK Central Bank Report CONFIRMS Immigration Leads To Lower Wages

The Report states clearly that a ’10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services leads to a 1.88 percent reduction in pay’. Government net migration numbers of over 300,000 annually, together with those that are not captured in official figures, is preventing wages rising in line with inflation for native, British workers, noticeable at the lower end of the skills classification scale. But the ‘knock on’ effects of this many outsiders entering the UK workforce impacts the disposable incomes of workers across the social spectrum and, with technological advances, hinders employment opportunities for British people.

That's not a surprise. Corporations rather pay immigrants because they demand less and they're usually not part of a union. But that's not proving a point--if these corporations can't pay lower wages to these people, they leave America and go overseas for production (i.e. Levis). They aren't hiring Americans to do that job when they can pay pennies overseas to do the same job.

[nate33]

UK Central Bank Report CONFIRMS Immigration Leads To Lower Wages

The Report states clearly that a ’10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services leads to a 1.88 percent reduction in pay’. Government net migration numbers of over 300,000 annually, together with those that are not captured in official figures, is preventing wages rising in line with inflation for native, British workers, noticeable at the lower end of the skills classification scale. But the ‘knock on’ effects of this many outsiders entering the UK workforce impacts the disposable incomes of workers across the social spectrum and, with technological advances, hinders employment opportunities for British people.

That's not a surprise. Corporations rather pay immigrants because they demand less and they're usually not part of a union. But that's not proving a point--if these corporations can't pay lower wages to these people, they leave America and go overseas for production (i.e. Levis). They aren't hiring Americans to do that job when they can pay pennies overseas to do the same job.

So what you are saying is that, due to globalization, we are doomed to declining wages for the foreseeable future? We have no recourse? How does the Democrat call for increasing the minimum fit into your thesis?

I think we do have a recourse: tariffs. Restrict immigration. Watch low-wage incomes rise. Tax the importations of widgets made in places like China or Mexico who can produce stuff cheaper thanks to pitiful environmental and health safety regulation coupled with currency manipulation.

[TGW]

UK Central Bank Report CONFIRMS Immigration Leads To Lower Wages

That's not a surprise. Corporations rather pay immigrants because they demand less and they're usually not part of a union. But that's not proving a point--if these corporations can't pay lower wages to these people, they leave America and go overseas for production (i.e. Levis). They aren't hiring Americans to do that job when they can pay pennies overseas to do the same job.

So what you are saying is that, due to globalization, we are doomed to declining wages for the foreseeable future? We have no recourse? How does the Democrat call for increasing the minimum fit into your thesis?

I think we do have a recourse: tariffs. Restrict immigration. Watch low-wage incomes rise. Tax the importations of widgets made in places like China or Mexico who can produce stuff cheaper thanks to pitiful environmental and health safety regulation coupled with currency manipulation.

I don't disagree with your solutions, and Obama has actually tried to implement tariffs on goods made from both of those countries. The problem is that the big corps cry foul. That's why you'll never see a restriction on immigration, Nate--the Republicans try and straddle the fence because they know their constituency likes to hear that rhetoric, but at the end of the day they (and the dems) are at the mercy of the big corporations.

[dobrojim]

It's more like 55%, but your point is well taken.

The question is, how many Republicans who are currently have an unfavorable impression will "hold their nose" and vote for him in the general election after he wins the primary.

republicans have enough trouble winning purple states with moderately inclusive candidates let alone a sexist bigot. best of luck, i can certainly see how excited you are

Every time I get insulted despite being perfectly civil in my posts, I know I am winning the argument.

maybe I shouldn't wade into this since I wasn't part of it...

that said, I don't see an insult directed at you. I see a characterization of Trump which you
probably don't like or agree with but nothing directed at you personally.

[crackhed]

It's more like 55%, but your point is well taken.

The question is, how many Republicans who are currently have an unfavorable impression will "hold their nose" and vote for him in the general election after he wins the primary.

republicans have enough trouble winning purple states with moderately inclusive candidates let alone a sexist bigot. best of luck, i can certainly see how excited you are

Every time I get insulted despite being perfectly civil in my posts, I know I am winning the argument.

not sure where the insult to u was but in this specific debate its a bit too early to claim victory and nominate trump.. cruz is just 4 pts behind in latest polls.

[fishercob]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zschonbrun/status/679659716247687168[/tweet]

[nate33]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zschonbrun/status/679659716247687168[/tweet]

It'll be interesting to see the tone of these adds. Will it be: "Guns are inanimate objects that kill people all by themselves. Vote Democrat to get guns off the streets!" Or will it take the unique opportunity that the NBA provides of reaching young black males and point out that a wildly disproportionate amount of gun-related homicide is perpetrated by young black males in illegal possession of the guns, and the victims are mostly black people. A more potent message might be: "Stop illegally obtaining and using guns and save your own community!"

[dobrojim]

just an observation that one of the worst mass shootings in recent memory, Newtown, did
not involved illegal weapons IIRC. Of course, that only counts if you dismiss the Newtown
conspiracy theories...you know, the govt did it for political reasons.

[tontoz]

Man showing how to clean a gun during video chat accidentally shoots self, dies

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/sfl-man-shoots-himself-cleaning-gun-dies-20151222-story.html

[DCZards]

It'll be interesting to see the tone of these adds. Will it be: "Guns are inanimate objects that kill people all by themselves. Vote Democrat to get guns off the streets!" Or will it take the unique opportunity that the NBA provides of reaching young black males and point out that a wildly disproportionate amount of gun-related homicide is perpetrated by young black males in illegal possession of the guns, and the victims are mostly black people. A more potent message might be: "Stop illegally obtaining and using guns and save your own community!"

Those who illegally sell guns should be the target as well as those who illegally obtain them...message should include the need to tighten sales at gun shows and the trafficking of illegal guns...by people of all ages and races.

[bsilver]

UK Central Bank Report CONFIRMS Immigration Leads To Lower Wages

The Report states clearly that a ’10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services leads to a 1.88 percent reduction in pay’. Government net migration numbers of over 300,000 annually, together with those that are not captured in official figures, is preventing wages rising in line with inflation for native, British workers, noticeable at the lower end of the skills classification scale. But the ‘knock on’ effects of this many outsiders entering the UK workforce impacts the disposable incomes of workers across the social spectrum and, with technological advances, hinders employment opportunities for British people.

I don't understand quoting one article and claiming it proves anything. Googling the effect of immigration on wages brings up many conflicting studies. This WSJ article looks at the complexity of the subject.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/06/01/does-immigration-suppress-wages-its-not-so-simple/
Being somewhat familiar with New York City I know that immigration has revitalized the city economically, and the same is true for other "gateway" cities. My feeling is that immigration's effects depend on the specifics of a particular area.

[WashWiz54]

I'm surprised nobody in this thread is talking about Virginia's Attorney General's decision on Concealed Carry with an out of state permit. Can anyone tell me how this wasn't a political move to pander to Bloomberg and the anti-gun nuts that got him into office? Where is evidence that suggests out of staters (with a CCP) are entering Virgina and causing gun-violence problems? People with permits have proven not to be the problem.

[Zonkerbl]

Your numbers are an order of magnitude off base. More like 1 guard per mile, or a 5-guard station every 10 miles. And this is all within the context of the absurdly high cost of illegal immigration. Estimates are that Illegal immigration costs the American taxpayer a whopping $113 billion per year! Believe me, the Wall will be a financial benefit.

And you say my numbers are way off base...

These numbers, sir, came directly from your butt.

And the study you cite is a crock. We discussed this last time. No estimate of the "costs" of illegal immigration is legitimate if all it does is take a snapshot of the costs at one given moment, rather than properly taking into account the immigrants' increasing tax contribution over time and over generations as their education and earnings rise. Lifetime earnings potential is elementary economics taught in introductory macro classes. Nowadays they probably teach this in high school.

My hypothesis is that incumbent Americans are lazy idjits and the incoming immigrants are actually more innately talented, on average, than us. Bringing their families in injects talent into an otherwise decaying stock of human capital and makes us better off in the long run (over a generation or so).

I've already posted numbers on multiple occasions that show that even the 2nd and 3rd generation of low skill immigrants are not positive contributors to the tax base (meaning they cost more than they pay). The first generation is generally a bit better than the original immigrants, but still a net drain. The second generation regresses from there.

You constantly dispute my facts, but never ever post any links or data.

I am constantly disputing your facts and you simply ignore the inconvenient arguments. I assure you if you go back and read through this thread you'll see that I've disputed this particular argument fully and completely, with facts and links and logic.

It is not my fault you do not remember any of this.

I am not going to repeat myself over and over and over when you can't be courteous enough to read and process what I say.

[Zonkerbl]

I'm surprised nobody in this thread is talking about Virginia's Attorney General's decision on Concealed Carry with an out of state permit. Can anyone tell me how this wasn't a political move to pander to Bloomberg and the anti-gun nuts that got him into office? Where is evidence that suggests out of staters (with a CCP) are entering Virgina and causing gun-violence problems? People with permits have proven not to be the problem.

You mean this article where the NRA basically blows a gasket that Virginia is trying to enforce the regulations they have?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/va-attorney-general-mark-herring-delivers-blow-to-gun-rights-advocates/2015/12/21/d72ce3d0-a821-11e5-9b92-dea7cd4b1a4d_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_vaguns-605am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Or, alternatively, the NRA nazis are trying to undermine Virginia's gun control laws so that psychopaths and felons can have all the guns they want, because THAT'S HOW WE MAKE THIS NATION SAFER, MORE GUNS AND MORE BLOOD AND MORE CHILDREN DYING.

We live in a nation of morons. We can take some simple actions to make everyone safer but no goddammit gotta have our toys.

We regulate cars. You have to take a test to get a permit to drive one. If you break too many laws we take that right away. You arguably have more right to own a car (pursuit of liberty of happiness) than you do to own a handgun. We regulate drugs. We regulate everything except guns, not because we need guns to keep ourselves safe (utter bs) nor as some necessary part of our livelihood but because people like playing with them, even though they know they are specifically designed to kill people.

How anyone could argue against the complete ban of guns is completely incomprehensible to me. Guns are evil. They are deadly. They are only toys, not even strictly necessary for anything. And yet not only is a ban out of the question, but even completely ineffectual regulation is somehow impossible to discuss. How stupid are we?

[crackhed]

UK Central Bank Report CONFIRMS Immigration Leads To Lower Wages

The Report states clearly that a ’10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services leads to a 1.88 percent reduction in pay’. Government net migration numbers of over 300,000 annually, together with those that are not captured in official figures, is preventing wages rising in line with inflation for native, British workers, noticeable at the lower end of the skills classification scale. But the ‘knock on’ effects of this many outsiders entering the UK workforce impacts the disposable incomes of workers across the social spectrum and, with technological advances, hinders employment opportunities for British people.

I don't understand quoting one article and claiming it proves anything. Googling the effect of immigration on wages brings up many conflicting studies. This WSJ article looks at the complexity of the subject.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/06/01/does-immigration-suppress-wages-its-not-so-simple/
Being somewhat familiar with New York City I know that immigration has revitalized the city economically, and the same is true for other "gateway" cities. My feeling is that immigration's effects depend on the specifics of a particular area.

overall i do think the numbers are headed in the wrong direction of late but i also believe its a very fixable problem. while the anti-immigrant types are predictably quick to demonize all immigration, most americans such as urself understand that legal immigrants are an important component to the lifeblood of this country. most legal immigrants come here prepared to work hard and become beneficial to society.