2 ms·

> immigrants/asylum seekers tend to be at bottom of economic scale which means any taxes they pay are extremely likely not to cover their share of cost. I unde

> immigrants/asylum seekers tend to be at bottom of economic scale which means any taxes they pay are extremely likely not to cover their share of cost. I understand that people are worried about this – and it's certainly an intuitive idea –, but is it true? I would count taxes on the total economic output / labour, not just the taxes from what is captured as salary (after all, underpaid workers make the world go 'round), but any analysis would do.

stackskipton 2y ago
I've searched for sources that break it down instead of just looking at United States GDP but also remember, states/counties can only capture income from sources that fall under that state/county. For example, immigrant worker enables bigger salaries for Tyson Food HQ people in Springdale, Arkansas but Tyson Food Plant in upstate New York means county/state in New York is absorbing that burden without getting taxes from Springdale, Arkansas people. So sure, the entire US GDP and thus taxes is extremely reliant on these workers but who sees the benefits is not uniform throughout the country and thus the friction around immigration.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  This explanation is even better than what I asked for! Do you know if increasing the minimum wage would stop people being so upset? I imagine this would funnel enough of the value immigrants are creating to the immigrants that they can pay tax in their local area, thus avoiding the "we're subsidising other parts of the country" problem – but I'm no economist. (The whole "pay a fair wage" thing has other benefits, but it might not solve this problem.)
  - stackskipton 2y ago
    Increasing the minimum wage might help but it's still a sticky problem. It probably requires some federal solution which is to say, it's not going to happen. I don't know the solutions, I'm just aware of the problem.

stackskipton 2y ago

I've searched for sources that break it down instead of just looking at United States GDP but also remember, states/counties can only capture income from sources that fall under that state/county. For example, immigrant worker enables bigger salaries for Tyson Food HQ people in Springdale, Arkansas but Tyson Food Plant in upstate New York means county/state in New York is absorbing that burden without getting taxes from Springdale, Arkansas people. So sure, the entire US GDP and thus taxes is extremely reliant on these workers but who sees the benefits is not uniform throughout the country and thus the friction around immigration.

wizzwizz4 2y ago
This explanation is even better than what I asked for! Do you know if increasing the minimum wage would stop people being so upset? I imagine this would funnel enough of the value immigrants are creating to the immigrants that they can pay tax in their local area, thus avoiding the "we're subsidising other parts of the country" problem – but I'm no economist. (The whole "pay a fair wage" thing has other benefits, but it might not solve this problem.)
- stackskipton 2y ago
  Increasing the minimum wage might help but it's still a sticky problem. It probably requires some federal solution which is to say, it's not going to happen. I don't know the solutions, I'm just aware of the problem.