3 ms·

I think we should deal in facts. We can for each immigrant estimate a net value to the nation in terms of taxes paid vs services received. Maybe they get food s

I think we should deal in facts. We can for each immigrant estimate a net value to the nation in terms of taxes paid vs services received. Maybe they get food stamps that cost 80k but pay 90k over their lifetime here in taxes. That’s great, let them come in! But, if you do this, you will quickly be forced to admit that many of these quasi-legal immigrants (undocumented workers?) pay in very little while drawing out much more in healthcare, education, criminal justice and other services. For any nation that can become unsustainable. At least that’s the numerate take. There’s an important “feels” take on this too. We shouldn’t just discard the “bad vibes” but should consider it alongside actual data.

SamoyedFurFluff 1y ago
We cannot for each immigrant do this estimation; that’s further bloating an already bloated visa and immigration system. You’d have legal appeals to under-estimations, etc etc. sounds like a nightmare. This is on top of economic studies that already exist that in aggregate immigrants have a good number of benefits to the economy, even when they initially need more resources invested. If you want actual data, the data is there.
- notmyjob 1y ago
  No citations? “ Therefore, despite legal restrictions on benefits for legal immigrants and outright bans for unlawful immigrants, the large difference in taxes paid between native-born Americans and immigrants without high school diplomas, even those of a very young age, results in a net fiscal cost—i.e., every additional immigrant aged 18–24 without a high school diploma is expected to worsen the fiscal outlook of the United States” https://manhattan.institute/article/the-lifetime-fiscal-impact-of-immigrants https://manhattan.institute/article/the-lifetime-fiscal-impa...
  - boston_clone 1y ago
    Plenty to pick apart about that research institute, but the author even acknowledges major analytical flaws before arriving at their shaky conclusion: >This report treats immigrants as individuals in order to avoid treating households of married native-born and immigrant residents as half-immigrant and half-native [...] The economics literature is divided on this matter, partially because the U.S. tax unit is households, not individuals. You should find better citations tbh.

SamoyedFurFluff 1y ago

We cannot for each immigrant do this estimation; that’s further bloating an already bloated visa and immigration system. You’d have legal appeals to under-estimations, etc etc. sounds like a nightmare. This is on top of economic studies that already exist that in aggregate immigrants have a good number of benefits to the economy, even when they initially need more resources invested. If you want actual data, the data is there.

notmyjob 1y ago
No citations? “ Therefore, despite legal restrictions on benefits for legal immigrants and outright bans for unlawful immigrants, the large difference in taxes paid between native-born Americans and immigrants without high school diplomas, even those of a very young age, results in a net fiscal cost—i.e., every additional immigrant aged 18–24 without a high school diploma is expected to worsen the fiscal outlook of the United States” https://manhattan.institute/article/the-lifetime-fiscal-impact-of-immigrants https://manhattan.institute/article/the-lifetime-fiscal-impa...
- boston_clone 1y ago
  Plenty to pick apart about that research institute, but the author even acknowledges major analytical flaws before arriving at their shaky conclusion: >This report treats immigrants as individuals in order to avoid treating households of married native-born and immigrant residents as half-immigrant and half-native [...] The economics literature is divided on this matter, partially because the U.S. tax unit is households, not individuals. You should find better citations tbh.