End of this immigration wave
“Things decline after their reach their peak” is as much of a tautology as “you always find your keys in the last place you look” but it is useful to recall that the tide turns at its highest. This is what is happening with immigration. Some of Americans are still fighting old immigration wars; others are welcoming or dreading the growing Hispanic influence in America. They are overtaken by events.
Germans are the biggest ethnic group in America. Few people know that and even fewer care because it doesn't matter. It did a century ago. People worried about it or welcomed it. There were calls to ban German. Nebraska had a law that made it illegal to teach in any language other than English and even restricted foreign language study. It was aimed at German. Nebraska in those days was like Arizona today in that it was full of immigrants and their children, only in this case many were German.
Today it is hard to believe there was ever a conflict. Generations to come will find it hard to understand our current concerns.
Mexican immigration has dropped to zero and may even have gone negative as more Mexicans leave than come in. The economy has a lot to do with this, but the Mexican birthrate has also dropped like a stone. Mexico will soon be running out of niños, which means fewer available to migrate to the U.S. The UN estimates that by 2040 the Mexican birthrate will be lower than that of the United States.
So maybe we should all lighten up about this. Once again, America has endured the big wave and remained America, actually enriched by the process. If you hoped/feared that America would become a Hispanic country you can feel disappointed/relieved. But it really won't matter. By 2040 the whole set of definitions will have changed.
If history is any guide, the sons and daughters of today's Mexican, African, German, Polish ... Americans will be complaining about how the latest wave of immigrants is not fitting in.
Posted by Christine & John at April 23, 2012 8:37 PM
Some perspective, C&J. This ain’t yore pappy’s economy. In the days of yore, say, 50-60 years ago an industrial revolution was in progress. Workers were needed. Now we find that worker wages have been flat or falling since about 1995. Some 25M are un-underemployed with scant hope of finding a job, even a minimum wage for the foreseeable future. The debt burden will surely plague us for the next 50 years, meaning few jobs will be created. We have come thru a technical revolution where robotic development has supplanted many middle class jobs. In brief, we don’t need as many workers today as we once did. Yet the 545, in responding to Copocracy pleas for cheap labor has continued with an open door policy for immigration. In the days of yore most immigration was managed thru Ellis Island or similar facilities where some modicum of citizen protection was afforded through paper checks, medical exams, etc. Today most of our immigration is illegal, cross border transit for anyone who is physically able to walk in. Gov’t does little to enforce immigration law and right to work law. Forged documents are used to gain access to the ‘system’. This, while the Fed fights any state that tries to protect their citizens from such illegal (under federal law) activity.
Adding insult to injury, the 545 is aiding and abetting illegal immigration by using taxpayer dollars to fund healthcare, education and associated judicial/security costs for the immigrant population. Then there is the related drug war that the 545 thinks ‘it is just impossible to stop’, along with ‘fast & furtious’ and similar. ‘Those tunnels are just so hard and expensive to find’ etc. And, ‘why, we can’t afford barb wire to go all across the county’, etc.
In summation: we don’t need more people, we need fewer. Yet, the 545 is determined to maintain the status quo, ie, open borders, for years to come if the people will just continue to let the gov’t stretch their big arse over our heads and keep dumping, which most seem very willing to do.
In so doing the 545/Corpocracy accomplishes two major pieces of their NWO. Driving worker wages down to a point where the US can compete in the NWO and providing the Corpocracy with the cheapest labor possible.
Long live the Corpocracy and the 545!!
Otherwise - - -
Illegal immigration, at least from Mexico, has just about stopped.
The imput/output flow has equalized, but we still have millions of illegal aliens in the country.
Yes, at least they know the US economy is daid. The 545 doesn’t seem to recognize that fact.
Otherwise - - -
So C&J it seems Obama’s policies on illegal immigration has worked better than expected.
Trivializing illegal immigration ignores the tremendous harm that has and continues to result from it.
In past eras, there were not so many freebies.
Today, illegal aliens bring their families here for free education, healthcare, Medicaid, and 50%+ don’t pay any income taxes because their compensation is under the table and off the books. And those with anchor babies can get Blue Passports, and welfare for anchor baby. 70% of all babies born at Parkland Memorial hospital are from illegal aliens.
Especially insensed are the victims of crimes and 6+ homicides per day committed by illegal aliens.
And the costs to U.S. citizens range between $70 Billion and $327 Billion annuaully, and that does not even include the numerous people and police murdered each day by illegal aliens (or the weapons from the nutty “Fast and Furious” ATF program used to kill hundreds of people including a U.S. border agent).
This does not make the illegal alien merely looking for work a villain.
The true villains are:
- the greedy illegal employers,
- the despicable politicians who pit U.S. citizens against each other for profits and votes,
- and the ignorant and idiotic voters who ignore the harm, condone illegal immigration, and somehow believe that the U.S. should let everyone come here to live on the dole, as if the U.S. is in some sort of over-population race.
At any rate, the voters have the government that they elect, and elect, and elect, … , and elect, at least until repeatedly rewarding greedy, incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.
If you mean ruining economic growth, you are right that Obama policies had a strong effect. It is the bad economy and the dropping birthrate.
The article about Parkland hospital hasn’t been updated since 2006.
Perhaps things are different now.
C&J ruining economic growth was done before Obama took office. Weak economic growth is a by product of the great recession.
Just as the economic policies of FDR extended the Great Depression; we also find the failed economic policies of President Obama has extended the economic problems of the past few years.
“Weak economic growth is a by product of the great recession.”
Not true, weak economic growth is a result of uncertainty in the market. It is a fact that businesses are sitting on cash, and it is because they are uncertain about what the future holds. And by future, I mean the president’s policies, i.e. HC, taxes, energy, etc.
Wasn’t uncertainty the conservative talking point of 3 years ago? Steven you would have me believe these titans of industry, the job creators, sitting upon billions are still holding up economic growth because they are uncertain of what the president, not Congress just the president, might do in the future?
With some of the illegals heading back home it seems demand may go down, which is the real issue. Demand is down Steven. The American consumer cannot afford what they could BB(before Bush and the conservatives).
I believe that Obama’s activities pumped money into the economy in 2009 and may have shaved a little off the downturn, but did so at the expense of the recovery.
The stimulus was poorly implemented. We were promised infrastructure shovel ready projects and we got cash for clunkers.
I don’t know how much credit or blame to give presidents for the economy. One thing that we know for sure is that whatever Obama did didn’t result in a robust economy. It may not be his fault, but he didn’t help either.
J2t2, yes, you are correct, uncertainty was a reason for slow economic growth 3 years ago and it still is. As far as two years ago, corporations were sitting on cash reserves. But this is not just a US problem; we find European corporations doing the same thing. The reason all corporations are sitting on cash is still uncertainty. There is also uncertainty in Europe, with many countries on the verge of bankruptcy. The problem of uncertainty does not solely rest with the president; the Congress has to take blame as well. It has been 3 years since the Senate has voted on a budget and this would of necessity create uncertainty. We also have the problem of the president wanting to tax corporation repatriated funds; which is where most international corporation surplus funds are located. J2t2, you are trying to blame Bush for policy that has been set or has been ignored by President Obama. It’s not that simple (just to blame Bush); when companies do not know what the outcome of Obamacare will be, and with the presidents anti-fossil fuel stand, and the indecision of whether to let the Bush tax cuts stand or expire, all of these things effect what corporations do with their money.
There have been several recent reports of consumer uncertainty and the stock market watches consumer reports; thus corporations are also uncertain.
Certainly the European countries are not blaming their uncertainty on Obama as well, are they? These companies have money which they are not returning to shareholders, they are hoarding it because demand is down. In part because they are hoarding the money. Does anyone honestly think that Obamacare is the reason a multinational corporation is sitting on the sidelines or do they believe it is a lack of opportunity due to the debt all of us and the rest of the world ran up during the roaring ‘00’s. We can make the easy to say hard to prove claim that the Stimulus is the reason the economy is not robust now as if the great recession was a mere business cycle economic downturn but isn’t that just a political ploy to make the voters believe the policies of the repubs would actually have done something better. Lets remember the Stimulus was a third in tax cuts not all cash for clunkers as C&J would have us believe.
Uncertainty, as evidenced by corporations hoarding cash. It must be a new phenomena. Something that Obama and Congress have created recently. But, it is not a new phenomena. It began in the 80s and continues to this day. Take a look at the chart in the following link. http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/07/corporate-cash-has-been-piling-up-since-1982/
If corporations have been hoarding cash and not investing in new US plants due to uncertainty, that uncertainty began with the Reagan administration and continues to this day. It didn’t suddenly appear with Obama.
Perhaps uncertainty is a driving factor in US corporate reluctance to invest in new plants, service centers, etc. If one is truly concerned about the reasons for this uncertainty, then they would look to factors that began in the 80s and continue to this day. Perhaps, they would look at the impact of free trade and wage arbitrage. Perhaps, they might understand the reluctance of corporations to invest in new US production centers if the very same product could be produced in China at a fraction of the cost and sold in the US market.
In my opinion, uncertainty is a product of the movement to a worldwide market of free trade. Not a judgment call but a reminder that corporate capital investment is a risky business in this environment. It is the volatility of markets over the past few decades that have thrown red flags over capital expenditures. The recent experience with solar energy production is a good example. China simply undercut the US manufacturers.
J2t2, companies have certainly been increasing dividends to the shareholders over the past few years. I’m not sure that you and Rich have a grasp on basic economics and how corporations work. You are trying to defend the president and blame Republicans and I am looking beyond that. I stated earlier that both parties have done things that hurt the economy. Bigger government is a hindrance to economic growth and Obama as well as Bush have been guilty of this. The Federal Debt is a hindrance to economic growth and both Bush and Obama are guilty of this. So each party is guilty.
J2t2, I did not blame the European economic problems on the president, and it’s silly for you to even bring this into the conversation. The point is Europe is facing economic problems. The question is why? And what are they trying to do to alleviate these problems. Many of their problems are based upon debt, uncontrolled spending, and large government payrolls. What are they doing to correct the problem; cutting federal spending, trying to raise retirement ages and cut retiree benefits, and lower corporate taxes. Each president has his own problems; Bush had his, Clinton has his, and Obama has his. To look at a problem and then say Clinton did this, or Bush did this, or Reagan did this; does not correct the problem. It’s president Obama’s watch, what will he do. Which brings me back to the original uncertainties: HC or obamacare (and its future), Taxes (what will happen to the tax cuts at the end of the year), and Energy (will the president continue to attack fossil fuel). The democrats love to say oil production is up; but it is up in spite of the president’s policies. The price of energy (fuel) is killing our economy. All of the recent economic indicators show us heading for another recession; so all of the almost $6 Trillion spent in the past 3 ½ years has done nothing to help our economy. And before you go into another rage of protecting president Obama, I realize that TARP can be blamed on both parties. I am not defending one party over the other, or blaming one party over the other; I am simply saying there are things that need to be done and they aren’t.
Illegal immigration has performed a miracle for the mortuary business, especially in Mexico. Thanks to illegal immigration, Mexico now has an economy.
Steven, Increasing dividends for years and decreasing them as well depending upon the company in question. The fact remains however that these companies are sitting on huge sums of cash that could be used to benefit the shareholders if the executives are to “uncertain” to invest the money for the benefit of the shareholders.
While I may not have a grasp of basic economics in your opinion, I do have a reasonable reality detector. The fact is we have hit the period where baby boomers are retiring. The surge in boomers retiring will cause havoc on the SS and Medicare systems for a couple of decades. But it isn’t a surprise to anyone is it? Yet the repubs “reformed” medicare without paying for the additional costs. Not only that they made it against the law for Medicare to negotiate with Big Pharma on the price of drugs. What kind of insider corporate knowledge or economics training does it take to figure out why?
As if that wasn’t enough at the same time they went to war, which as we all know is costly, but to make matters worse we decided to rebuild the country we went to war with on the taxpayers dime without the taxpayers labor and materials. To make matters worse they decided a tax cut was in order while fighting these wars. What kind of economic training is needed to realize that wasn’t the right thing to do?
So we come to the present and we see you telling us “Bigger government is a hindrance to economic growth….. The Federal Debt is a hindrance to economic growth …..” both Obama and Bush are at fault you say, but who intentionally ran up the debt knowing it is a hindrance to economic growth according to economic guru’s and who grew the debt due to the policies of his predecessor?
What I see is conservatives using the “starve the beast” scheme to destroy the SS and Medicare systems for ideological reasons. So you really haven’t seen rage yet Steven you have seen my reply to a conservative mythology you seem to perpetuate.
So lets talk large government payrolls Steven. What kind of economics guru would force the USPS to fund their retirement plan ahead for 75 years? What kind of CEO would do that? Of course the answer is a conservative economics guru and a conservative CEO right? Because that is exactly who did this, the conservative repubs in a lame duck session in ‘06. So I don’t know what kind of an economic guru you are but I do know the ideology you have espoused so far is voodoo economics. Which has proved to be a failure. The USPS is a false crisis created intentionally by repubs to further their failed ideology.
j2t2, in the conversation about the US economy, you have managed to bring in every liberal talking point of the past 3 years. It’s hard to have a logical discussion when one party continually brings up new points and fails to discuss the original topic. You fail to see a problem on both sides of the isle and you continue to blame Bush. Therefore you are free to continue your rant with yourself. I thought this web site was for the purpose of discussion, but I guess I was wrong. Thank you for your comments.
Steven what I have done is presented some basic facts regarding what I believe to be the intentional damage done to the Country economically by what I perceive to be the same economic ideology you are trying to tell me will fix our problems. So I am very skeptical of someone who answers me with a response such as “I’m not sure that you and Rich have a grasp on basic economics and how corporations work.”
But I am a big boy Steven, I will listen, so tell me how these “talking points” I have mentioned have helped the economy and why we should move forward with more of the same economic ideology. I need to understand why you guys espouse austerity after watching the European governments that tried that approach have slipped back into a recession, much like our Country did in ‘37.
Either you have enough of a grasp on economics to explain where I am wrong or your are regurgitating conservative talking points without the knowledge to explain why I am mistaken in my opinion. Which is it?
You were the one who said that corporations are sitting on cash due to the policies of the President and Congress over the past two years. I simply pointed out the empirical fact that cash hoarding by corporations began in the 80s and continues to this day. It didn’t start with Obama. Researchers have identified a number of reasons for this including the primary cause of market volatility creating uncertainty for major capital investments. The movement to a global economy and international free trade probably has more to do with it.
I would also recommend that you read the recent remarks by Chairman Bernanke on the potentially catastrophic consequences of cutbacks in federal spending and expiration of the Bush tax cuts on the recovering economy. They will both suck money out of the private sector at a time when the private sector economy is still on federal life support. As jt2t points out, the austerity experiment in Europe is turning into a disaster. England is now officially in a double dip recession following the conservative government’s austerity budgets. Ireland is in political turmoil over the austerity measures and the continued recessionary economy.