#buildthewall

[cnewton157]

I’m thinking he doesn’t

I keep hearing the trades are in desperate need of workers. Yet they’re filled with illegals?

Which is it? Because it seems many Americans are unwilling to put in that work.

 

[UCFhonors]

I suppose because of how they weigh their metrics, which is fair but you could probably use some of those same metrics and determine that France was in pretty good shape in the early 1800s as well.

There's no accounting for wealth consolidation or wage disparity generally. If all you look at is GDP, CPI, and inflation then sure, illegal immigration probably is a net plus.

The point is, in the next 5-10 years we are going to need a lot of inflationary pressure in the labor market to overcome the total number of dollars that are going to be coming back into the market. We need the very bottom of the market to start rising and outpace the upper end. Thats where illegal immigration becomes a problem because it keeps the bottom end stagnant. Its great for the high wealth and income individuals but is going to be exponentially worse for the paycheck to paycheck people.

Yep. Immigration is a net positive / net plus.

People tend to over complicate things. A net positive is economic lingo for a Good thing. Immigration is universallly a Good thing.

 

[Crazyhole]

Yep. Immigration is a net positive / net plus.

People tend to over complicate things. A net positive is economic lingo for a Good thing. Immigration is universallly a Good thing.

In and of itself, yes absolutely. At the same time we also have some factors that need to be considered on whether or not the net benefits of illegal immigration are still worth it. If you go back to the 70s when Friedman made his statements about it, we were still somewhat monetarily responsible. That isnt the case for the last 20 years so we have a different dynamic to account for. Friedman warned about money printing and the effect it has on inflation much more than he advocated for immigration. We've been extremely fortunate that most of the dollars we have printed over the last 2 decades are still circulating overseas, but that simply cannot last forever. Eventually they HAVE to come back and we will either have to account for the fact that there are 3 times the dollars now in circulation and the affect it has on velocity or we are going to have to contract the money supply at a rate that has never been done before without falling into a perpetual deflationary cycle. Personally i would much rather see a short period of hyperinflation than a long period of deflation, but that is predicated on having wage inflation lead, not lag. One of the keys to that is to reset the labor force and get it back in line with wage demand.

 

[sk8knight]

Go read your Constitution.

No, you tell me where in the Constitution it addresses immigration. Other than the Naturalization clause which grants control over citizenship to Congress.

 

[UCFhonors]

No, you tell me where in the Constitution it addresses immigration. Other than the Naturalization clause which grants control over citizenship to Congress.

It doesn't. That IS the point.

But just in case you needed to understand how the read Constitution as in it doesn't give People their rights, it lists the powers that people naturally have which they are giving to the federal government, go read the 10 amendment. There should be no confusion after at.

 

[sk8knight]

It doesn't. That IS the point.

But just in case you needed to understand how the read Constitution as in it doesn't give People their rights, it lists the powers that people naturally have which they are giving to the federal government, go read the 10 amendment. There should be no confusion after at.

Yet the Supreme Court, who are much more educated in the Constitution than you or I, have set and reaffirmed precedent granting the power to regulate immigration to The federal government and restricting states from enacting immigration policy.

I’m guessing you’re an open borders advocate.