Immigrants to the US cover a very wide spectrum - from people like Andy Grove of Intel, Alferd Hitchcock, Linus Torvalds, to the clueless, uneducated, and criminal.
The NET effect on the US is very positive.
There are two problems.
1) First is the positive contributions, like higher income, tend to be captured by the Federal government. Local governments tend to rely on property taxes and sales taxes.
California has an income tax, but it only captures some of the contribution.
The costs, for law enforcement, welfare, public health, and having LA schools teach classes in 30+ languages, are born locally.
2) The second problem is that California has attracted a disproprotinate number of the lower skilled immigrants, mostly from Mexico, Central America, and people like the Laotian Hmong.
Average eductaion levels of first generation Mexican immigrants in California is about 8-9th grade.
Average education of first generation Cuban immigrants in Florida is 12 years of high school and about 2 year of post secondary.
The Mexican immigrants prior to about 1960 have been assimilated/integrated into California, and their next generation moved into the mainstream.
The current generation is numerically MUCH larger, and seems to be having more problems with education. This may be due to the collaspe of California public schools or other factors.
*******
So a big part of California's budget and economic problem, for prisons, schools, welfare, hospitals, etc. comes from the unrestricted immigration of lower skilled people.
If the United States was as selective as Austrailia (which I think would be a bit too far), this problem would decline rapidly.
Meanwhile, California gets to pick up the cost. |
