Immigration (Both Legal and Illegal) Breaks the Backs of U.S. Taxpayers

[HoustonCynic]

Originally Posted by Kele

Did you read the study at all? I mean, I know it's 72 pages, but it's worth reading.

This is not a man with an agenda. He merely analyzed 13 governmental agencies and the financial impact of immigration, both legal and illegal, on said agencies.

Edwin S. Rubenstein, president of ESR Research, economic consultants, has 25 years of experience as a business researcher, financial analyst, and economics journalist. Mr. Rubenstein joined the Hudson Institute, a public policy think tank headquartered in Indianapolis, as director of research in November 1997. While at Hudson he wrote proposals and conducted research on a wide array of topics, including workforce development, the impact of AIDS on South Africa’s labor force, Boston’s “Big Dig” the economic impact of transportation infrastructure, and the future of the private water industry in the United States.

As a journalist, Mr. Rubenstein was a contributing editor at Forbes Magazine and economics editor at National Review, where his “Right Data” column was featured for more than a decade. His televised appearances include Firing Line, Bill Moyers, McNeil-Lehrer, CNBC, and Debates-Debates. In The Right Data (National Review Press, 1994), Rubenstein debunks many widely held beliefs surrounding the distribution of income, government spending, and the nature of economic growth.

Mr. Rubenstein is also an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute where he is principal investigator in the institute’s ongoing analysis of New York state’s budget and tax structure. He also published a newsletter devoted to economic statistics and contributed regularly to The City Journal, the Manhattan Institute’s quarterly.

From 1980 to 1986 he was senior economist at W.R. Grace & Co. where he directed studies of government waste and inefficiency for the Grace Commission.

From 1978 to 1980 he was a municipal bond analyst for Moody’s Investors Service where he was also editor of the Bond Survey, a weekly review of the municipal bond market. He served as senior quantitative analyst for the Office of the Mayor of New York City from 1973 to 1978. He also was staff economist for the New York State Commission on Education (the Fleischman Commission), and was principal investigator on a study of multinational corporations published by the Institute for Public Administration. Mr. Rubenstein has a B.A. in economics from Johns Hopkins, and an M.A. in public finance from Columbia University.

Yes I have read it. He has impressive credentials but he still takes a position and does not fully explor the costs of fully enforcing our immigration laws, secured borderst to the n'th degree and the affects to cross border commerce not just with Mexico but also Canada. We need increased security but the real question is how much of an increase and at what cost. Basically if we do nothing it costs us... if we do something it costs us as well. Which is the lesser of the two? We don't know these costs to make an informed decision. We only know the emotional side and base our decisions on a part of the whole equation.

[jamesandveybe]

I would debate your unwritten assumption that legal immigrants drain as much from the system as illegal. Legal immigrants follow the rules, pay large fees to even be considered for entry, and depend on their citizen sponsor to foot most or all expenses.

I agree that illegals are a drain, but legals are not. They pay their way, and their fees compensate the government for processing.

If you are talking about legal immigrants who come here at the request of employers wanting cheaper labor (Microsoft, etc) then I agree. However, that is due to employer choices. Only the consumer can change that issue, with their buying power.

[Kele]

Originally Posted by jamesandveybe

I would debate your unwritten assumption that legal immigrants drain as much from the system as illegal. Legal immigrants follow the rules, pay large fees to even be considered for entry, and depend on their citizen sponsor to foot most or all expenses.

I agree that illegals are a drain, but legals are not. They pay their way, and their fees compensate the government for processing.

If you are talking about legal immigrants who come here at the request of employers wanting cheaper labor (Microsoft, etc) then I agree. However, that is due to employer choices. Only the consumer can change that issue, with their buying power.

Would you say then that political refugees are legal immigrants? Our government is bringing them in "legally." Did you read the part of the study which clarified the cost to American taxpayers of bringing in refugees and the number of refugees that the U.S. accepts yearly?

If you read the study, then you are already aware that Mr. Rubenstein targets those legal immigrants who are not high school graduates, those who spend their lives in the welfare system, and those refugees who never manage to assimilate into the American culture, in addition to the cheap labor that American corporations import to undercut American wages.

[wehotex]

Originally Posted by tinman01

I would like to know the ethnic backgrounds on those they study. As it stands its to generic. Not to mention I am not going to filter through 72 pages to find it either.
To say immigration of any kind should be banned because immigrants don't contribute is a zenophobic statement at best. I have yet to meet an asian immigrant that accepts a hand out of any kind. Being married to a thai I have met quite a few. Its almost taboo to them not to earn their keep.

if you go visit westminster, calif (or calif in general) you will find many asian immigrants who are on medi-cal (calif's medicaid plan).