Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

I linked yesterday to a Steve Sailer article about a new George Borjas study linking immigration and economic inequality. Today's immigration and poverty facts come from a recent column by Robert Samuelson:

The inflow of poor Hispanic immigrants, along with their (often) American-born children, has increased poverty. From 1995 to 2005, the rise in the number of Hispanics in poverty -- by 794,000 -- more than accounted for the entire increase in America's poverty population. Poverty among blacks, though still high, declined. Among non-Hispanic whites, it held roughly steady. Health-insurance coverage has also been affected. Since 1995, Hispanics account for about 78% of the increase in the uninsured ... [People] who support lax immigration policies across our Southern border should understand that these policies deepen American inequality.

Call me blockheaded, call me unsophisticated, tell me I just don't get it. But I remain convinced that one of the easiest steps we could take to reduce both our poverty problems and our un-health-insured problems would be to reduce illegal immigration.

Best,

Michael

UPDATE: From a new report by the Center for Immigration Studies:

Between 2000 and 2005, the number of young (16 to 34) native-born men who were employed declined by 1.7 million; at the same time, the number of new male immigrant workers increased by 1.9 million ... It appears that employers are substituting new immigrant workers for young native-born workers ... The increased hiring of new immigrant workers also has been accompanied by important changes in the structure of labor markets and employer-employee relationships. Fewer new workers, especially private-sector wage and salary workers, are ending up on the formal payrolls of employers, where they would be covered by unemployment insurance, health insurance, and worker protections.

You're right, but like me, you're a horrible person for saying so.

Posted by: susan on September 28, 2006 2:49 PM

Would they be streaming here in such numbers if the U.S. offered them poverty? The question answers itself. No, for them coming here is a big step up.

That they are simultaneously dragging us down, also is obvious. But who is "us?" The 90 plus percent of the population that can't escape behind guards and gates and all the cushions that wealth affords. In other words: all those who don't count.

When, and only when, those who count begin to feel "immigrant pain," will the problem be addressed.

Posted by: ricpic on September 28, 2006 3:12 PM

It's odd they just reported the California will soon be facing major problems with its state and local govt. pension costs and medical coverage. Add the illegal alien costs to this, toss in the general govt. waste, and we are heading for a perfect storm of financial problems. This isn't speculation or opinion.

The last thing I heard my legislators were up to was SB626 (I believe is the number). It would allow those without driver's licenses to get their impounded cars back in 24 hours, while those with driver's licenses wait 30 days. Gee, I wonder who that is meant to aid.

Seriously, what does man do living in such insane times?
SteveN

Posted by: steve a on September 29, 2006 2:06 AM

Plus add in the effect on schools. If there is a disaster in country XXX and we accept 100,000 refugees one time, as the children advance through the school systems, each year they would tend to understand English better and the older children with several years of schooling could help bring the younger children (and parents) along. Programs that help bring the adults into the mainstream, help them find and keep jobs, etc coupled with schooling for the children will have changed that group in 10 years. True, some will never acclimate but many will.

But only if that group remains the only group accepted. If you keep bringing in 100,000+ refugees from country XXX every year for 10-15 years, you fight the same battles every year. Every year there's a new crop of both children and adults to try to educate and bring into the mainstream. After a while, there is enough of a core that isn't making the transition that even those who could find it less necessary or appealing to make the effort.

This is unfortunately where we are today in the US. Our schools are having to start over every year with a new batch of students in nearly every grade just as though they had made no progress whatsoever in previous years. And we're amazed at the low test scores and the high costs!

Posted by: D Flinchum on September 30, 2006 9:12 AM






Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?