Illegal immigration

[Eugene]

[quote=rnen]
What about the added cost to social services when they retire? I read somewhere, (will try and find it), that the average age of an illegal immigrant is near 40.
[/quote]

That is a long way off. Besides, you don’t get the full package (social security, free medicare) unless you naturalize and work full-time above ground for 10 years.

The fact that white and asian educated Americans don’t want to have children is a much bigger problem.

[EconProf]

A superficial take on both candidates’ positions is that they are both for legalization. But McCain had to backtrack considerably on that position during the primaries and now is far less pro-legalization than Obama.
Given that newly legalized citizens would overwhelmingly vote democrat, it should be plain where Obama would stand.

[EconProf]

A superficial take on both candidates’ positions is that they are both for legalization. But McCain had to backtrack considerably on that position during the primaries and now is far less pro-legalization than Obama.
Given that newly legalized citizens would overwhelmingly vote democrat, it should be plain where Obama would stand.

[EconProf]

A superficial take on both candidates’ positions is that they are both for legalization. But McCain had to backtrack considerably on that position during the primaries and now is far less pro-legalization than Obama.
Given that newly legalized citizens would overwhelmingly vote democrat, it should be plain where Obama would stand.

[EconProf]

A superficial take on both candidates’ positions is that they are both for legalization. But McCain had to backtrack considerably on that position during the primaries and now is far less pro-legalization than Obama.
Given that newly legalized citizens would overwhelmingly vote democrat, it should be plain where Obama would stand.

[EconProf]

A superficial take on both candidates’ positions is that they are both for legalization. But McCain had to backtrack considerably on that position during the primaries and now is far less pro-legalization than Obama.
Given that newly legalized citizens would overwhelmingly vote democrat, it should be plain where Obama would stand.

[peterb]

The economic environment we’re headed into will not bode well for those that can be declared as scape goats. Tight money will create conservative politics. It alwasy does. Back lash is coming.

[peterb]

The economic environment we’re headed into will not bode well for those that can be declared as scape goats. Tight money will create conservative politics. It alwasy does. Back lash is coming.

[peterb]

The economic environment we’re headed into will not bode well for those that can be declared as scape goats. Tight money will create conservative politics. It alwasy does. Back lash is coming.

[peterb]

The economic environment we’re headed into will not bode well for those that can be declared as scape goats. Tight money will create conservative politics. It alwasy does. Back lash is coming.

[peterb]

The economic environment we’re headed into will not bode well for those that can be declared as scape goats. Tight money will create conservative politics. It alwasy does. Back lash is coming.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

It’s my impression that illegals are first hired/first fired, and also that many of them provide “optional” services– gardening, restaurant bussing, etc. As legal citizens pull in their spending horns due to the economy, these spending items might be the first to go.

Some anecdotes:

1) A commentor on another econ blog, some number of months ago, said that the “brown” people (whether green card or illegal) working construction were the first to be let go. She had talked to a Guatemalan guy who was planning to go back to Central America to look for work there, because work had dried up here. This was before we saw the dip in construction employment numbers here in SD/on Rich’s charts. My take was that the “shadow employees” were let go first, hiding the impact on overall construction employment till later in the housing downturn.

2) A headline in the U-T, a couple of months ago, said that Tijuana border crossing traffic was way down.

[/anecdotes]

What I hate is when people on both sides of the argument lump “immigration” and “illegal immigration” together and then everybody gets into a hairball about it. I have no problem with people who immigrate legally or get their green card, it’s the fence-jumpers who get on my nerves.

I have to wonder how much the price of housing here in SD is due to illegals cramming 10 and 15 to a house and paying whatever the landlord demands because hey, it’s only a couple hundred each for them.

It’s clear that San Diego housing is overcrowded. Go down any street in Mira Mesa or Clairemont and see how many cars are parked along the curb by people doubling and tripling up in their houses.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

It’s my impression that illegals are first hired/first fired, and also that many of them provide “optional” services– gardening, restaurant bussing, etc. As legal citizens pull in their spending horns due to the economy, these spending items might be the first to go.

Some anecdotes:

1) A commentor on another econ blog, some number of months ago, said that the “brown” people (whether green card or illegal) working construction were the first to be let go. She had talked to a Guatemalan guy who was planning to go back to Central America to look for work there, because work had dried up here. This was before we saw the dip in construction employment numbers here in SD/on Rich’s charts. My take was that the “shadow employees” were let go first, hiding the impact on overall construction employment till later in the housing downturn.

2) A headline in the U-T, a couple of months ago, said that Tijuana border crossing traffic was way down.

[/anecdotes]

What I hate is when people on both sides of the argument lump “immigration” and “illegal immigration” together and then everybody gets into a hairball about it. I have no problem with people who immigrate legally or get their green card, it’s the fence-jumpers who get on my nerves.

I have to wonder how much the price of housing here in SD is due to illegals cramming 10 and 15 to a house and paying whatever the landlord demands because hey, it’s only a couple hundred each for them.

It’s clear that San Diego housing is overcrowded. Go down any street in Mira Mesa or Clairemont and see how many cars are parked along the curb by people doubling and tripling up in their houses.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

It’s my impression that illegals are first hired/first fired, and also that many of them provide “optional” services– gardening, restaurant bussing, etc. As legal citizens pull in their spending horns due to the economy, these spending items might be the first to go.

Some anecdotes:

1) A commentor on another econ blog, some number of months ago, said that the “brown” people (whether green card or illegal) working construction were the first to be let go. She had talked to a Guatemalan guy who was planning to go back to Central America to look for work there, because work had dried up here. This was before we saw the dip in construction employment numbers here in SD/on Rich’s charts. My take was that the “shadow employees” were let go first, hiding the impact on overall construction employment till later in the housing downturn.

2) A headline in the U-T, a couple of months ago, said that Tijuana border crossing traffic was way down.

[/anecdotes]

What I hate is when people on both sides of the argument lump “immigration” and “illegal immigration” together and then everybody gets into a hairball about it. I have no problem with people who immigrate legally or get their green card, it’s the fence-jumpers who get on my nerves.

I have to wonder how much the price of housing here in SD is due to illegals cramming 10 and 15 to a house and paying whatever the landlord demands because hey, it’s only a couple hundred each for them.

It’s clear that San Diego housing is overcrowded. Go down any street in Mira Mesa or Clairemont and see how many cars are parked along the curb by people doubling and tripling up in their houses.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

It’s my impression that illegals are first hired/first fired, and also that many of them provide “optional” services– gardening, restaurant bussing, etc. As legal citizens pull in their spending horns due to the economy, these spending items might be the first to go.

Some anecdotes:

1) A commentor on another econ blog, some number of months ago, said that the “brown” people (whether green card or illegal) working construction were the first to be let go. She had talked to a Guatemalan guy who was planning to go back to Central America to look for work there, because work had dried up here. This was before we saw the dip in construction employment numbers here in SD/on Rich’s charts. My take was that the “shadow employees” were let go first, hiding the impact on overall construction employment till later in the housing downturn.

2) A headline in the U-T, a couple of months ago, said that Tijuana border crossing traffic was way down.

[/anecdotes]

What I hate is when people on both sides of the argument lump “immigration” and “illegal immigration” together and then everybody gets into a hairball about it. I have no problem with people who immigrate legally or get their green card, it’s the fence-jumpers who get on my nerves.

I have to wonder how much the price of housing here in SD is due to illegals cramming 10 and 15 to a house and paying whatever the landlord demands because hey, it’s only a couple hundred each for them.

It’s clear that San Diego housing is overcrowded. Go down any street in Mira Mesa or Clairemont and see how many cars are parked along the curb by people doubling and tripling up in their houses.

[Author]

Posts