I saw that same WSJ headline and thought the exact same thing. If the "migrants" provide so much economic "growth", then why are the mayors and governors of every sanctuary jurisdiction begging for federal funding? They should tax the "growth" to pay for the "migrant" services. Easy peasy.
I hate intellectual inconsistent and I hate hypocrisy. That article/headline killed both birds with one stone.
Because most of them are not allowed to get jobs. They get to sit around and get meals made for them. The people mostly come here to work and then are forced to be a suck on resources. The system is dysfunctional.
I would say that some, but not all, come to find work. And then we have the larger problem of how adding to the low skill labor pool negatively affects low skill wage rates. Nothing, not even good intentions, happens in a vacuum. Sure, I would love cheap landscaping for my house. But not at the cost of throwing entry level workers from the neighboring town out of work.
At best that is a misleading number. At worst it is economic data that is useless as a tool to evaluate a societal problem. A significant percentage of our population is out of the work force and they don't show up in the unemployment numbers. Frankly, they are on the dole. This is true either because they have received no useful skills while in school, they have drug/lifestyle issues, they have family/child care issues, etc. Much like a country without borders isn't a country, a country in which 40% of the population is unemployable isn't a country. Willfully importing a low skill workforce does not solve the problem of what to do with our underclass. It kicks the can down the road. Our underclass is not going to evaporate. It will be a continual growing problem until it is solved. Importing low skilled migrants to solve an economic problem is putting a band aid on a bump that turns out to be a cancer tumor.
I understand the limitations of the measure. There's definitely work that non-employed people could do. It is a longer term issue that needs to be dealt with. That doesn't fix today's issue. And the issue is far larger than low-skill labor. I think there's a guy who posts here who either owns a business or was in charge of staffing for positions that were reasonably high-wage jobs. He couldn't get good workers due to drug (even legal) or self-discipline issues.
I have an idea, let's all break windows all over the place. Property owners then will have to replace them, resulting in massive economic growth. /sarc.
There are people who believe in the Broken Windows fallacy, mainly because they've never been educated in economics. Most of these people reside on the Left of the political spectrum.
Or, we could dig holes, then fill them up again. But let's really take it to the next level, and build windmills that might generate electricity once in a while but not often enough to shut down existing power plants. Seems illegals can climb, given some fence videos floating around.
Why stop with the windows. If everything is burned to the ground, think of the economic boom that will cause. Where is BLM when we need them to boost the economy?
We already had racist roads. Now we add racist municipal bonds and racist climate change. Hard to believe adults (so called) are having these conversations in America.
The WSJ has had a long fall from reporting news and information useful in business and finance.
A story I used to tell--now a decade and a half past its sell-by date--was that Rupert Murdoch wanted a national newspaper to compete with the New York Times. By adding coverage of sports, arts & fashion, lifestyle (cooking, travel, etc.), a weekend edition, the result is a platform for attracting advertising revenues that is (literally) indistinct from the New York Times.
And as a clue to those who remember the WSJ previous to News Corp's acquisition, under opinion editor Robert Bartley (1937-2003), who, in a July 2, 2001 editorial, reminded readers that during the immigration debate of 1984 the WSJ suggested a constitutional amendment: "There shall be open borders."
The fall (or demise) of the WSJ is not nearly as recent as it might otherwise seem.
The RINO's are mostly stupid, but they are also corrupt and bought and paid for. By whom? Lot's of different interests. Military Contractors. Chamber of Commerce types. And on and on and on.
Very, very few, actually a miniscule number of US Senators truly have the interests of their constituents at heart. The number might be fewer than five.
I've written about this since 2014, when the Obamas made the rules. I've also calculated how illegals living on handouts live better than citizens after you factor in 1) no taxes paid on undeclared income, 2) no medical insurance costs, but they can visit a clinic or hospital and skip the payment, 3) charities hand out food that citizens do pay for, 4) their kids get free lunches - and sometimes breakfast, too, 5) illegals never buy car insurance, and 6) the state pays most of their rent when citizens can't find a place to live. I understand their desire for a better life, but there are millions who followed the rules and struggle to make that better place for their children a reality. They wanted to come here believing amnesty is coming soon. They're more than willing to wait a lifetime to see it happen.
A key question you raise: How is the CBO coming up with its numbers? Because the only thing worse than doofuses writing economics is doofuses making up statistics. Somewhere along the line, academia has learned that all you have to do is pick the number you like and then reverse-engineer the data. For someone who sweated through 2years of post-grad statistics, this is particularly insulting. Did you know that if you take the right subset of Taylor Swift’s earnings and extrapolate, you can prove conclusively that her income will pass the American GDP in our lifetime?
Further proving our world is upside down. Illegal cannot be used to describe offenders IF they are part of an "egregiously oppressed hot wokie cause" subgroup. Obnoxious pandering to voter demographics, and at the risk of sounding conspiratorial, despite it being an obvious strategy which qualifies as a conspiracy, because they- the left- laugh it off as silly or crazy, which is evident when we look at Democrats' demands to allows illegals to vote. Throw in the absurd lies of journalism sycophants who obey the "requests" to plant stories, true or false/accurate or inaccurate, pushing agendas with thinly veiled covers.
I saw that same WSJ headline and thought the exact same thing. If the "migrants" provide so much economic "growth", then why are the mayors and governors of every sanctuary jurisdiction begging for federal funding? They should tax the "growth" to pay for the "migrant" services. Easy peasy.
I hate intellectual inconsistent and I hate hypocrisy. That article/headline killed both birds with one stone.
Because most of them are not allowed to get jobs. They get to sit around and get meals made for them. The people mostly come here to work and then are forced to be a suck on resources. The system is dysfunctional.
I would say that some, but not all, come to find work. And then we have the larger problem of how adding to the low skill labor pool negatively affects low skill wage rates. Nothing, not even good intentions, happens in a vacuum. Sure, I would love cheap landscaping for my house. But not at the cost of throwing entry level workers from the neighboring town out of work.
Unemployment rates are at 3.7%, which is close to recent historical lows.
At best that is a misleading number. At worst it is economic data that is useless as a tool to evaluate a societal problem. A significant percentage of our population is out of the work force and they don't show up in the unemployment numbers. Frankly, they are on the dole. This is true either because they have received no useful skills while in school, they have drug/lifestyle issues, they have family/child care issues, etc. Much like a country without borders isn't a country, a country in which 40% of the population is unemployable isn't a country. Willfully importing a low skill workforce does not solve the problem of what to do with our underclass. It kicks the can down the road. Our underclass is not going to evaporate. It will be a continual growing problem until it is solved. Importing low skilled migrants to solve an economic problem is putting a band aid on a bump that turns out to be a cancer tumor.
I understand the limitations of the measure. There's definitely work that non-employed people could do. It is a longer term issue that needs to be dealt with. That doesn't fix today's issue. And the issue is far larger than low-skill labor. I think there's a guy who posts here who either owns a business or was in charge of staffing for positions that were reasonably high-wage jobs. He couldn't get good workers due to drug (even legal) or self-discipline issues.
Hell of a justification for open borders.
Then how can it be tied to the strength of the american economy as you claimed above? It can't be both.
I have an idea, let's all break windows all over the place. Property owners then will have to replace them, resulting in massive economic growth. /sarc.
Someone got your memo and went to work overnight!!
https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-crime-south-loop-indiana-avenue-cars-damaged/14431925/
There are people who believe in the Broken Windows fallacy, mainly because they've never been educated in economics. Most of these people reside on the Left of the political spectrum.
Or, we could dig holes, then fill them up again. But let's really take it to the next level, and build windmills that might generate electricity once in a while but not often enough to shut down existing power plants. Seems illegals can climb, given some fence videos floating around.
Why stop with the windows. If everything is burned to the ground, think of the economic boom that will cause. Where is BLM when we need them to boost the economy?
In the WSJ this week I also read about LeBron James, how municipal bonds are racist and how all of Trump's claims are FALSE.
There has been a real evolution over there.
Admiral Levine is saying climate change is racist these days. Talk about an embarrassing doofus!
We already had racist roads. Now we add racist municipal bonds and racist climate change. Hard to believe adults (so called) are having these conversations in America.
The WSJ has had a long fall from reporting news and information useful in business and finance.
A story I used to tell--now a decade and a half past its sell-by date--was that Rupert Murdoch wanted a national newspaper to compete with the New York Times. By adding coverage of sports, arts & fashion, lifestyle (cooking, travel, etc.), a weekend edition, the result is a platform for attracting advertising revenues that is (literally) indistinct from the New York Times.
And as a clue to those who remember the WSJ previous to News Corp's acquisition, under opinion editor Robert Bartley (1937-2003), who, in a July 2, 2001 editorial, reminded readers that during the immigration debate of 1984 the WSJ suggested a constitutional amendment: "There shall be open borders."
The fall (or demise) of the WSJ is not nearly as recent as it might otherwise seem.
There is a cost of non-assimilation that WSJ will never understand.
Not stupid, sir, corrupt. The supply of cheap labor, easy prey, and bribes can not be allowed to dry up.
When I first read this headline I was excited that I was going to read something that would completely denigrate Paul Krugman.
Disappointment is not a fine tea to drink on Friday morning.
The RINO's are mostly stupid, but they are also corrupt and bought and paid for. By whom? Lot's of different interests. Military Contractors. Chamber of Commerce types. And on and on and on.
Very, very few, actually a miniscule number of US Senators truly have the interests of their constituents at heart. The number might be fewer than five.
It is depressing.
I cancelled my 20 year subscription to the WSJ last September after a week of bullshit climate change scaremongering.
Our media, the WSJ included now, gets away with using straw man arguments as the basis for their reporting, and it’s only getting worse.
Thanks for writing about this.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan hit the nail on the head when he wrote "Defining Deviancy Down" about 30 years back. His prophecy is in full swing!
The letters to the editor should be interesting in the coming days.
Unrelated, it was fun to see the Illini give Michigan a drubbing this week.
No more money
Freeze the government
https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/next-with-kyle-clark/every-denver-city-department-to-plan-for-budget-cuts-to-pay-for-migrant-crisis/73-6096d59c-3f95-4cb1-91e1-39b411d1aa2f
Here’s the plan:
1: Bring in illegal aliens
2: ???
3: GROWTH!!!
I've written about this since 2014, when the Obamas made the rules. I've also calculated how illegals living on handouts live better than citizens after you factor in 1) no taxes paid on undeclared income, 2) no medical insurance costs, but they can visit a clinic or hospital and skip the payment, 3) charities hand out food that citizens do pay for, 4) their kids get free lunches - and sometimes breakfast, too, 5) illegals never buy car insurance, and 6) the state pays most of their rent when citizens can't find a place to live. I understand their desire for a better life, but there are millions who followed the rules and struggle to make that better place for their children a reality. They wanted to come here believing amnesty is coming soon. They're more than willing to wait a lifetime to see it happen.
A key question you raise: How is the CBO coming up with its numbers? Because the only thing worse than doofuses writing economics is doofuses making up statistics. Somewhere along the line, academia has learned that all you have to do is pick the number you like and then reverse-engineer the data. For someone who sweated through 2years of post-grad statistics, this is particularly insulting. Did you know that if you take the right subset of Taylor Swift’s earnings and extrapolate, you can prove conclusively that her income will pass the American GDP in our lifetime?
Further proving our world is upside down. Illegal cannot be used to describe offenders IF they are part of an "egregiously oppressed hot wokie cause" subgroup. Obnoxious pandering to voter demographics, and at the risk of sounding conspiratorial, despite it being an obvious strategy which qualifies as a conspiracy, because they- the left- laugh it off as silly or crazy, which is evident when we look at Democrats' demands to allows illegals to vote. Throw in the absurd lies of journalism sycophants who obey the "requests" to plant stories, true or false/accurate or inaccurate, pushing agendas with thinly veiled covers.