Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants

Josh Rosenbluth wrote:

( previous post snipped-follow thread )

I think you are misreading Krugman. He is saying the illegals IN THEIR
CURRENT NUMBERS are a net economic minus.



Well, duh, Josh, if the illegal felons in their present numbers are a net economic minus, don't you think we ought to do something about that? don't you think we ought to STOP the drain?


Your lack of response to the dilemma you have created for yourself is noted. If the present numbers are a drain, prudence and common sense that we should take steps to REDUCE those current numbers, don't you think? And given that, just how do you propose to reduce the CURRENT number of illegal felons?

Another liberal, Robert Reich
(http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11364),

echoes some of these beliefs with an emphasis on enforcing labor laws
to maintain wage rates.



Why stop there? If we eliminate the source, we eliminate the problem.
Why do you reject that? Because you need to be warm and fuzzy?




Because there is some number of immigrants - between zero and 10
million - that is "correct" for our economy.

Krugman doesn't think so. Why do you?

Josh, you contradict yourself. Above you say the CURRENT numbers are a net economic minus, but here you say that those numbers are correct.


The current number is over 10 million. It's too high (for now), but zero is too low.

There goes the warm and fuzzy thinking again. Just WHY are you afraid to deport these felons? Capitalism thrives on new industry and having a labor pool available to those endeavors. Removing all the illegals will create that labor pool among our citizens, and promote capitalist ventures which will enhance our economy, while reducing the welfare expenditures Krugman indicates that our society provides. Reducing those expenditures reduces the required tax levy to fund same, which in turn, reduces the tax burden on citizens. In short, Josh, there are NO minuses and a whole lot of plusses to sending these felons BACK to Mexico, or wherever they came from.

Are you saying that it is 'correct' to have a net economic minus on our economy? Krugman certainly isn't suggesting that we continue with such a foolish policy. He simply won't take the next step and say that we ought to remove the drain. He doesn't want to tarnish his liberal credentials, even though I suspect that he knows that there is no other way to solve the problem. And you do too.

I also believe that the

"correct" number will accelerate over time because of our increasing
proportion of retirees.



Josh, the 'correct' number is ZERO.


That's a persuasive argument.

Indeed. Once which you should get behind.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants
    ... Josh Rosenbluth wrote: ... CURRENT NUMBERS are a net economic minus. ... Well, duh, Josh, if the illegal felons in their present numbers are a ... What do we do about those costs NOW? ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Paul Krugman: No more illegal immigrants
    ... giving legal status to most of the current illegals. ... Well, duh, Josh, if the illegal felons in their present numbers are a net economic minus, don't you think we ought to do something about that? ...
    (soc.retirement)