Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
41 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: The State of Immigration Today rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/reports/...

VERY informative article, showing some startling statistics, that seem to go against the grain of those that argue immigration is bad for the U.S. But the reaility shows that, in general, immigration is a net positive in most areas mentioned below. Laughs, but there is one stat down there that should alarm the Repubs, namely, that immigrants typically vote Democratic. Some nuggets shown below, taken from the article;

More Mexican immigrants are returning home than arriving in the United States. From 2009 to 2014, 1 million immigrants returned to Mexico while 870,000 arrived in the United States.

More than half of the foreign-born population are homeowners. In 2015, 50.7 percent of immigrant heads of household owned their own homes, compared with 65.2 percent of U.S.-born heads of household.

Immigrants are becoming homeowners at a faster rate than the U.S.-born population. From 1994 to 2015, immigrant homeownership rose 2.3 percentage points while U.S.-born homeownership remained flat.

Working-class, immigrant-headed households with incomes less than 200 percent of the federal poverty line rely less on public benefits and social services than comparable U.S-born households. In 2015, working-class, immigrant-headed households with children received 9.3 percent of their overall income from public programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Social Security, in comparison with U.S.-born-headed households, which received 15 percent of their income from such programs.25 Research consistently shows that working-class immigrants use social programs such as Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income at similar or lower rates than native-born households.

The 20 million adult U.S.-born children of immigrants have higher incomes than their parents.

Compared with all Americans, U.S.-born children of immigrants are more likely to go to college, less likely to live in poverty, and equally likely to be homeowners.

Immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be incarcerated than the U.S.-born population.

Unauthorized immigrants are increasingly entering the United States legally and overstaying visas rather than crossing the border.

Unauthorized immigrants are often part of the same family as authorized immigrants and native-born Americans.

Unauthorized immigrants are overrepresented in the labor force relative to the size of the overall population. In 2015, 7 million unauthorized immigrants worked in the United States. They represented 4.9 percent of the U.S. labor force, although they comprised only 3.5 percent of the U.S. population.

President Barack Obama was re-elected in 2012 with the support of 71 percent of Latino voters and 73 percent of Asian American voters.

Latino and Asian American voters largely supported former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over President Donald Trump in the 2016 election. Seventy-nine percent of Latino voters supported Clinton and 18 percent supported Trump.52 Asian Americans voted similarly, with 79 percent supporting Clinton and 17 percent supporting Trump.53

Millions of lawful permanent residents are eligible to become U.S. citizens and vote. A total of 8.5 million* lawful permanent residents, or green card holders, were eligible for naturalization as of January 2014.58 In 2015, nearly 730,000 people naturalized and became eligible to vote.59 Barriers to naturalization, including the $680 application fee, effectively deny many residents the chance to become U.S. citizens and exercise their right to vote.

Immigrants added an estimated $2 trillion to the U.S. GDP in 2016.

Over the long run, the net fiscal impact of immigration is positive. From 2011 to 2013, children of immigrants contributed $1,700 per person to state and local budgets, and immigrants’ grandchildren contributed another $1,300. Across three generations, immigrants’ net contribution, per person, was $900

As Baby Boomers retire en masse over the next 20 years, immigrants will be crucial to filling these job openings and promoting growth of the labor market.

Unauthorized immigrants contribute significantly to Social Security and Medicare.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Parsons
United States
Carrollton
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
But, but... they're illegal.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chengkai Yang
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One quip about home ownership. I think as far as actual citizenship applications and wherewithal goes, fat stacks of cash and owning a home help for going through the legal hoops than the crossing the border approach.

The ability to gain citizenship in a country is far easier for the affluent almost universally. I think it's mostly Asia that tends to be more restrictive on this with Japan being one of the worst.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


I don't understand this question, if the net result is positive, should the laws not be changed, and the borders eased?

What exactly are you arguing here, save for the nebulous "But we have laws and borders on the books for a reason"?

Not to be critical, but this responses smacks slightly of a conservative that got smacked with the facts that immigration has, in net, been positive for the U.S., but has to come up with a reason to oppose immigration anyway.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorge Montero
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
I'll take Manhattan in a garbage bag. With Latin written on it that says "It's hard to give a shit these days"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


They are as meaningful as copyright lasting 95 years after publication, drug legislation, or speed limits of 55 on the highway.
5 
 Thumb up
0.35
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:

I don't understand this question, if the net result is positive, should the laws noe be changed, and the borders eased?

Quote:
What exactly are you arguing here, save for the nebulous "But we have laws and borders on the books for a reason"?


Not to be critical, but this responses smacks slightly of a conservative that got smacked with the facts that immigration has, in net, been positive for the U.S., but has to come up with a reason to oppose immigration anyway.


You are reading WAAAAAAY to much into it. The issue is the whole immigration debate around illegals seems to ignore the whole illegal portion of it - and your whole argument (here) boils down to, if it benefits the greater good, then who cares about the legality - we should support it.

I actually do agree we should change immigration laws - my mother had to naturalize - so if it was not for a LEGAL way to immigrate, I would not be a citizen either. Immigration has been an OVERWHELMING force for positive change in the US.

But, do some research on what it takes to immigrate to other countries in the world and what they do about illegal immigration (say, Canada or Australia) and then start comparing it to the US. Suddenly we look to be pretty damn compassionate.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hibikir wrote:
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


They are as meaningful as copyright lasting 95 years after publication, drug legislation, or speed limits of 55 on the highway.


yep, all stupid and should be changed - but they are the laws of the land and until changed should be enforced. Breaking the rule of law in a country is a very dangerous precedent.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Pennsylvania
msg tools
badge
Bitter acerbic harridan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


I have two questions back to you. Does it make sense to tighten legal immigration rules (e.g., lowering per country limitations, having language requirements, having educational requirements, etc.), while simultaneously increasing deportations? Does it make sense to have a "one-size fits all" policy on illegal immigration?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Pennsylvania
msg tools
badge
Bitter acerbic harridan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
hibikir wrote:
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


They are as meaningful as copyright lasting 95 years after publication, drug legislation, or speed limits of 55 on the highway.


yep, all stupid and should be changed - but they are the laws of the land and until changed should be enforced. Breaking the rule of law in a country is a very dangerous precedent.


If someone's parents broke the law 15 years ago when the person was 3, should we treat that person the same as someone that came here 6 months ago illegally? If so, why?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sue_G wrote:
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


I have two questions back to you. Does it make sense to tighten legal immigration rules (e.g., lowering per country limitations, having language requirements, having educational requirements, etc.), while simultaneously increasing deportations? Does it make sense to have a "one-size fits all" policy on illegal immigration?


see above - but in short, No.

But ignoring laws because it is "the right thing to do" is even less appealing (at least to me, YMMV).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:

I don't understand this question, if the net result is positive, should the laws noe be changed, and the borders eased?

Quote:
What exactly are you arguing here, save for the nebulous "But we have laws and borders on the books for a reason"?


Not to be critical, but this responses smacks slightly of a conservative that got smacked with the facts that immigration has, in net, been positive for the U.S., but has to come up with a reason to oppose immigration anyway.


You are reading WAAAAAAY to much into it. The issue is the whole immigration debate around illegals seems to ignore the whole illegal portion of it - and your whole argument (here) boils down to, if it benefits the greater good, then who cares about the legality - we should support it.

I actually do agree we should change immigration laws - my mother had to naturalize - so if it was not for a LEGAL way to immigrate, I would not be a citizen either. Immigration has been an OVERWHELMING force for positive change in the US.

But, do some research on what it takes to immigrate to other countries in the world and what they do about illegal immigration (say, Canada or Australia) and then start comparing it to the US. Suddenly we look to be pretty damn compassionate.


The article deals in immigration, although it does relay some stats regarding illegal immigration. Not so sure about the compassionate statement, it would seem Europeans are fairly liberal with regards to immigration (and recently, refugee acceptance).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sue_G wrote:
If someone's parents broke the law 15 years ago when the person was 3, should we treat that person the same as someone that came here 6 months ago illegally? If so, why?


Right now, unfortunately, yes, that is how the law is written. But I like pretty much everyone here hope to see Congress legalize the Dreamers.

So, question back to you - should we ignore laws because we think they are too mean? or should we change the laws?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:
The article deals in immigration, although it does relay some stats regarding illegal immigration. Not so sure about the compassionate statement, it would seem Europeans are fairly liberal with regards to immigration (and recently, refugee acceptance).


Hint, European are not any more forgiving for legal immigration and they are even less supportive of illegals. Their refugee policies are more liberal, that I will certainly grant you.

I can personally tell you that naturalizing to the Netherlands is a massive PITA.

Edit - changing The to Their.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


I don't understand this question, if the net result is positive, should the laws not be changed, and the borders eased?

What exactly are you arguing here, save for the nebulous "But we have laws and borders on the books for a reason"?

Not to be critical, but this responses smacks slightly of a conservative that got smacked with the facts that immigration has, in net, been positive for the U.S., but has to come up with a reason to oppose immigration anyway.


And as a conservative, I have long advocated that those laws be revisited, particularly the yearly quotas. But that doesn't change the question that was asked... do we just turn a blind eye to any law we don't like in any given moment? Sounds like the DACA debacle waiting to happen all over again. One executive favors turning a blind eye to the policies, people flood in. Next executive favors a more hard-line policy, hardship is inflicted on those who had come here. So the question comes again.... the law, the border, do we just turn a blind eye? Because the Sword of DACAmoclese hanging over immigrants here is such a pleasant thing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GameCrossing wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


I don't understand this question, if the net result is positive, should the laws not be changed, and the borders eased?

What exactly are you arguing here, save for the nebulous "But we have laws and borders on the books for a reason"?

Not to be critical, but this responses smacks slightly of a conservative that got smacked with the facts that immigration has, in net, been positive for the U.S., but has to come up with a reason to oppose immigration anyway.


And as a conservative, I have long advocated that those laws be revisited, particularly the yearly quotas. But that doesn't change the question that was asked... do we just turn a blind eye to any law we don't like in any given moment? Sounds like the DACA debacle waiting to happen all over again. One executive favors turning a blind eye to the policies, people flood in. Next executive favors a more hard-line policy, hardship is inflicted on those who had come here. So the question comes again.... the law, the border, do we just turn a blind eye? Because the Sword of DACAmoclese hanging over immigrants here is such a pleasant thing.


I wholly agree that comprehensive immigration reform should be taken on, but the results of immigration to date (as indicated in the article stats) would imply that Trump is going in the wrong direction, and potentially about to stifle immigration, which has been a net positive to the U.S. Wouldn't you agree?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:
I wholly agree that comprehensive immigration reform should be taken on, but the results of immigration to date (as indicated in the article stats) would imply that Trump is going in the wrong direction, and potentially about to stifle immigration, which has been a net positive to the U.S. Wouldn't you agree?


Potentially, Trump's stance is actually coming closer to what the vast majority of the world utilizes. The US has historically had one of the most liberal immigration policies. I would argue that world wide, the ability for people to migrate is too restricted (again, take a look at Canada or Australia).

So, personally, I do hope that we have meaningful immigration reform - which includes enforcement.

So, question back to you - do we ignore laws we don't like? or do we go about changing them?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?

Chad;

You're smarter than this argument makes you sound. Of course borders and laws mean something but in and of itself crossing a border harms no one and nothing. Personally I think such laws unjust and so am fine with them being ignored as an act of civil disobedience as a form of democratic protest. Border crossing should IMO only be illegal for people who are or might be dangerous. A gov't needs a better reason to make something which does no harm illegal than "We said so."
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
I wholly agree that comprehensive immigration reform should be taken on, but the results of immigration to date (as indicated in the article stats) would imply that Trump is going in the wrong direction, and potentially about to stifle immigration, which has been a net positive to the U.S. Wouldn't you agree?


Potentially, Trump's stance is actually coming closer to what the vast majority of the world utilizes. The US has historically had one of the most liberal immigration policies. I would argue that world wide, the ability for people to migrate is too restricted (again, take a look at Canada or Australia).

So, personally, I do hope that we have meaningful immigration reform - which includes enforcement.

So, question back to you - do we ignore laws we don't like? or do we go about changing them?


I think we go about changing them, given that they are contrary to what the article shows, that a liberal immigration policy has been positive for the U.S. in the past. There is no reason to think that that will not continue into the future. But Trump attempting to "strengthen" immigration is misguided. What he really means is "tighten".
3 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
…So, question back to you - do we ignore laws we don't like? or do we go about changing them?

Protestors ignore them to prompt them to get changed. Gov'ts change them due to the will of the public in a democratic society. Of course the protestors have to accept getting arrested in the process. Still I think police arresting non-dangerous people for border crossing is just stupid and wastes time and resources.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jasper
Netherlands
Leiden
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
I can personally tell you that naturalizing to the Netherlands is a massive PITA.
When from outside of the EU, yeah. I can confirm that from my own experience*. A fucking nightmare.


* albeit not me personally.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorge Montero
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
I'll take Manhattan in a garbage bag. With Latin written on it that says "It's hard to give a shit these days"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
abadolato01 wrote:
The article deals in immigration, although it does relay some stats regarding illegal immigration. Not so sure about the compassionate statement, it would seem Europeans are fairly liberal with regards to immigration (and recently, refugee acceptance).


Hint, European are not any more forgiving for legal immigration and they are even less supportive of illegals. Their refugee policies are more liberal, that I will certainly grant you.

I can personally tell you that naturalizing to the Netherlands is a massive PITA.


You say Europeans, but you might just mean Dutch. Have you been to Spain in the last 20 years? We are Europeans too. While there's no open border, our policies for both legal and illegal immigration are far softer than the US.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorge Montero
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
I'll take Manhattan in a garbage bag. With Latin written on it that says "It's hard to give a shit these days"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
hibikir wrote:
Utrecht wrote:
batman wrote:
But, but... they're illegal.


So borders and laws mean nothing?


They are as meaningful as copyright lasting 95 years after publication, drug legislation, or speed limits of 55 on the highway.


yep, all stupid and should be changed - but they are the laws of the land and until changed should be enforced. Breaking the rule of law in a country is a very dangerous precedent.


OK, so you are saying we need stronger enforcement of those laws that I just mentioned, which Americans break every single day? Do you never drive over the speed limit, or are you a terrible person that doesn't follow the law of the land, and thus set up a very dangerous precedent?

Why aren't we jailing more white people that smoke weed? The outrage! Is the federal government setting a very dangerous precedent by not walking into, say, California, and closing every very illegal dispensary? You should be enraged at how the federal government deals with this kind of situation.

Either that, or you are being a big hypocrite.
5 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Cook
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
If the only thing that is wrong with illegal immigration is that it is illegal, then change the law and - magic - problem solved.
1 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bill Cook
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
hibikir wrote:
Have you been to Spain in the last 20 years?


I've been to Catalonia. Does that count
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.