Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal

[Deborah K]

No, Deborah has clearly explained to us all over and over that those dollars that leave are never seen again. Apparently the brown people like little paintings with green ink, perhaps it's a hobby to collect them.

oh you again. Study the mexican economy and their dependence on our dollars being sent to them. If they are benefiting from our dollars, then how can we also be benefiting from them?

 

[Unspun]

I actually do not find this argument to be an indictment on immigration, legal or illegal. I find it to be an indictment on the welfare state. End the welfare state and problem solved.

 

[Blueskies]

They earned it, can't they do with it what they want?

For example, I have a lot of Chinese investments. That's money I earned in the US being sent to China. Are you going to crucify me for it?

 

[__27__]

oh you again. Study the mexican economy and their dependence on our dollars being sent to them. If they are benefiting from our dollars, then how can we also be benefiting from them?

Our dollar have no value unless they are returned at some point to the US economy. Their only value along the way is the assumption that SOMEONE will be willing to exchange local currency or goods with the intent of using the dollars back in the marketplace which holds their value.

But I forgot, you told me that they never come back, so that means it's true. Like I said, apparently they like collecting small pictures made with green ink. A very artistic culture.

 

[Deborah K]

They earned it, can't they do with it what they want?

For example, I have a lot of Chinese investments. That's money I earned in the US being sent to China. Are you going to crucify me for it?

Not the same thing, at all! And who said anything about crucifying anyone?

First of all, they earned the money illegally. You try earning money illegally in Mexico, or any other country. We are either governed by the rule of law or we aren't. Every country has immigration laws.

 

[erowe1]

Not to rain on the parade you two are having ... but all US Dollars come back to the US eventually (with few exceptions). Sovereign Trust Funds are a large scale way it happens.

I actually agree with you. I was speaking within the assumption for the sake of argument that she was right about those $$ not getting back here. If that were so, then it would only reduce the amount of currency in circulation here, not the amount of capital we have.

 

[Lord Xar]

No, Deborah has clearly explained to us all over and over that those dollars that leave are never seen again. Apparently the brown people like little paintings with green ink, perhaps it's a hobby to collect them.

oh, just a matter of time before the open door apologists start clouding the scene.

I have 100 dollars, I send $50 to mexico - which gets converted to pesos that then moves into the local mexico economy (to whomever the criminal sent the monies). That $50 is not spent or used in the United States. It hurts the average american citizen because they, the american citizen, has to spend his/her tax dollars subsidizing the criminals behaviour (schools, hud housing, medical care, roads/infrastructure), and because those monies the criminal makes doesn't even get spent locally - in the local economy, the local area becomes a host for the parasite. In addition, because we subsidize these criminals, there is no incentive to ever spend the money here (some local US town).. ie, housing, schooling, medical etc... the american citizen makes up the difference.

SO, if you are using roundabout ways to validate money leaving the country as a wash, then you are being dishonest.

 

[erowe1]

oh, just a matter of time before the open door apologists start clouding the scene.

I have 100 dollars, I send $50 to mexico - which gets converted to pesos that then moves into the local mexico economy (to whomever the criminal sent the monies). That $50 is not spent or used in the United States. It hurts the average american citizen because they, the american citizen, has to spend his/her tax dollars subsidizing the criminals behaviour (schools, hud housing, medical care, roads/infrastructure), and because those monies the criminal makes doesn't even get spent locally - in the local economy, the local area becomes a host for the parasite. In addition, because we subsidize these criminals, there is no incentive to ever spend the money here (some local US town).. ie, housing, schooling, medical etc... the american citizen makes up the difference.

SO, if you are using roundabout ways to validate money leaving the country as a wash, then you are being dishonest.

How exactly does sending that $50 to Mexico hurt anyone here (regardless of what it subsidizes there)?

Would it also hurt people here if you just burned your $50? It is, after all, just a piece of paper with numbers on it either way. It's not in itself capital. The capital that exists here will still exist here. And, in fact, thanks to immigrants (illegal or not) working for low wages and thanks to foreign countries sending us stuff cheaper than we can make it here, sometimes at the expense of their own consumers and tax payers, we end up having more capital here, not less.

This is related to the issue of trade deficits. There's some good stuff on that topic at mises.org, such as this:
http://mises.org/story/2029

 

[__27__]

oh, just a matter of time before the open door apologists start clouding the scene.

I have 100 dollars, I send $50 to mexico - which gets converted to pesos that then moves into the local mexico economy (to whomever the criminal sent the monies). That $50 is not spent or used in the United States. It hurts the average american citizen because they, the american citizen, has to spend his/her tax dollars subsidizing the criminals behaviour (schools, hud housing, medical care, roads/infrastructure), and because those monies the criminal makes doesn't even get spent locally - in the local economy, the local area becomes a host for the parasite. In addition, because we subsidize these criminals, there is no incentive to ever spend the money here (some local US town).. ie, housing, schooling, medical etc... the american citizen makes up the difference.

SO, if you are using roundabout ways to validate money leaving the country as a wash, then you are being dishonest.

Do you think at all, or just make things up in your head as you go along. Your scenario stopped at CONVERTED TO PESOS. What, so you mean they just throw dollars into the air and when they come back down to earth they are pesos? The Pesos are given to them by SOMEONE who is either going to return the dollars to the market that gives them value (US) or who plans on again using them for exchange to someone who will. Without the understanding that at SOME POINT the dollars will return to the American market, the dollars are WORTHLESS, and would not be able to be spent in Mexico.

The rest is your misdirected anger at people over a broken system. The welfare state is the enemy, NOT the immigrant worker.

You fucking nationalists are disgusting.

 

[Objectivist]

The big problem is that the honest small businessman who hires legal workers has to pay government mandated payroll, and employment taxes into the system (about 15%) It is quite a burden, and leaves this business at a disadvantage, perhaps causing this honest business to close its doors.

There are also business run by illegal aliens, (many are Asian) who avoid having to pay taxes like sales tax, payroll tax, etc. They can lower their prices by 30% and still profit as much as the honest businessman.

The welfare state will not end anytime soon, so the most practical way to end this, is to simply audit the businesses who break the law. The fear of having to pay hefty fines or jailtime will quicly keep the cheaters in line.

I just got my insurance bill and it's over $6000 again this year. That doesn't include workmans comp, just liability and vehicle insurance for my trucks.

 

[Objectivist]

How exactly does sending that $50 to Mexico hurt anyone here (regardless of what it subsidizes there)?

Would it also hurt people here if you just burned your $50? It is, after all, just a piece of paper with numbers on it either way. It's not in itself capital. The capital that exists here will still exist here. And, in fact, thanks to immigrants (illegal or not) working for low wages and thanks to foreign countries sending us stuff cheaper than we can make it here, sometimes at the expense of their own consumers and tax payers, we end up having more capital here, not less.

This is related to the issue of trade deficits. There's some good stuff on that topic at mises.org, such as this:
http://mises.org/story/2029

You really have to ask that question about the $50 USD going to Mexico?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico#Remittances

 

[TurtleBurger]

Jose's boss is paying Jose $15 when he could be paying Joe $25 + boss's share of SS (say $5 just to make it a round number). That means Jose's boss now has an extra $15/hour in his pocket to stimulate the US economy in other ways.

 

[erowe1]

You really have to ask that question about the $50 USD going to Mexico?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico#Remittances

Sorry. But did you think there was something in that wikipedia article that indicates that those remittances are bad for the US economy? If so, then could you answer my question. Would it also be bad for the US economy if all those dollars were burned instead of sent to Mexico?

 

[Vessol]

So this article is in favor of amnesty?

^^

 

[TurtleBurger]

oh, just a matter of time before the open door apologists start clouding the scene.

I have 100 dollars, I send $50 to mexico - which gets converted to pesos that then moves into the local mexico economy (to whomever the criminal sent the monies). That $50 is not spent or used in the United States. It hurts the average american citizen because they, the american citizen, has to spend his/her tax dollars subsidizing the criminals behaviour (schools, hud housing, medical care, roads/infrastructure), and because those monies the criminal makes doesn't even get spent locally - in the local economy, the local area becomes a host for the parasite. In addition, because we subsidize these criminals, there is no incentive to ever spend the money here (some local US town).. ie, housing, schooling, medical etc... the american citizen makes up the difference.

SO, if you are using roundabout ways to validate money leaving the country as a wash, then you are being dishonest.

I send money to a charity that does relief work in Mexico. Am I hurting the economy by sending my money down there? Is it actually any of anyone's business what I do with the money that I earned myself?

 

[Objectivist]

Sorry. But did you think there was something in that wikipedia article that indicates that those remittances are bad for the US economy? If so, then could you answer my question. Would it also be bad for the US economy if all those dollars were burned instead of sent to Mexico?

I can tell you from the perspective of somebody who lives in a high level of illegal immigrant population area, that the money they send to Mexico IS NOT stimulating the local economy.

I also see 16% unemployment in my county, and 20% in Salinas.

 

[erowe1]

I can tell you from the perspective of somebody who lives in a high level of illegal immigrant population area, that the money they send to Mexico IS NOT stimulating the local economy.

I also see 16% unemployment in my county, and 20% in Salinas.

You're dancing around the question. Does sending Federal Reserve notes to Mexico hurt America's economy? If so, then how? Would it also hurt our economy if you burned your money?

 

[powerofreason]

This isn't a thread in favor of the police state is it? Cuz thats what it smells like.

 

[Kludge]

This isn't a thread in favor of the police state is it? Cuz thats what it smells like.

So what if it is?

 

[powerofreason]

Lets lay down the truth here and exercise the Non-Aggression Principle when it comes to these so called "illegal immigrants".

1. An owner of a private business may hire whomever he chooses, at any rate of pay, as a voluntary agreement between employer and employee.
2. Crossing made up, invisible lines in the sand, is not wrong.
3. "Government land" is in fact unowned land and therefore cannot be trespassed against, vandalized, or have anything wrong done to it.
4. Accepting stolen money or property is not a crime in and of itself.
5. Governments are immoral organizations and any authority they claim to possess is in reality just a whole bunch of usurpations of property rights. Only a private property owner has authority, and the authority does not extend beyond the property boundaries.