SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Oeconomicus who wrote (59655)6/11/2007 10:25:05 AM
From: mph  Read Replies (3) of 90947
 
I checked out your link and do not find it persuasive.

Here's one quote:

The studies tend to agree on only one thing: immigrants' relative contributions to public revenues. Specifically, there is general agreement that, currently, illegal immigrants contribute less to public revenues than do those who were amnestied under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). They, in turn, contribute less than legal immigrants, who contribute less than the native-borns. This finding merely reflects differences in the average incomes of these various groups rather than in their immigration status per se. In short, the suggestive finding that illegal immigrants are net consumers of public services is more a product of their low incomes than of their immigration status.

So my question is: Why would we want to encourage more low income households who need public services?

Your article even acknowledged that it was difficult to calculate the net cost. Your take-away was far too optimistic, imo. The article was also based on 1990's studies, which are way out of date at this point.

I'm guessing that this is the kind of data McCain uses to justify his posture on immigration. True?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext