The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
America's Broken Immigration System
archivistkitsune
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
This has been a subject that has come up frequently in many of D&D's US political threads. Immigration reform has been a rather important issue in US politics for some time and talking about it in the peripheral sense, as it relates to other US political topics, doesn't seem to do the topic justice. Often only one part of immigration really gets addressed when it shows up in other threads; usually, that has to do with how it'll impact demographics in elections. I think occasionally, we'll get some limited discussion about the social and economic impacts of both the actions and lack of actions taken on the matter (Hedgies thread about tech industry exploiting visas comes to mind here. This thread will attempt move beyond the election optics and get discussion going on the social and economic impacts, that the current broken system has created because this is going to be a major issue in US politics for quite some time.
First let's have a look at some some figure.
-Pew estimates that population of undocumented immigrants was around 11.7 million as of March 2012. Believe it or not the population peaked at 12.2 million in 2007. In 1993, this population was estimated to be about 3.5 million. (source)
-The number of apprehensions by the US Border Patrol, along the Mexico border rose through 1990 until they peaked in 2000 with that year having 1.7 million apprehensions. The number of apprehensions then dropped somewhat from 2001-2007. In 2007 they dropped dramatically. In 2012 this number increased modestly, but interestingly enough the increase seems to be from non-Mexicans, while the apprehension of Mexicans at the border continued to decline. (see source provided in the above bullet).
I figure the above has some the most salient figures to consider for future immigration policy. It gives us a rough idea of the total number of people in the US illegally. The second bullet is big because almost all opposition to reform, always sites a need to increase the US border security along the Mexican border (note how it rarely, if ever, talks about such a need along the Canadian border, the coasts, our various ports or people just failing to leave when their visa expires).
Now Lets talk about some of the economic and social impacts of illegal immigration.
-It's believed that illegal immigration has a harmful effect on wages, in sectors that are impacted, since that gives scummy employers a pool of workers that are willing to work for less or they can just flat out fuck them over, since the undocumented immigrant can't really go to the authorities. As much as I hate the "they're taking our jobs" line, there does seem to be some evidence that they do take jobs from certain kinds legal residents. They typical take low skilled and low paying jobs and impacts populations where the high school dropout rate is high.
-It's estimated that undocumented workers pay 7 billion dollars a year in Social Security. (source)
-CBO has found that the taxes generated from illegal immigrants do no offset the costs of the social services they use from local and state governments. Though it's believed the impact that these individuals have on state and local budgets is modest. (source)
-Looking through crime is kind of murky data point, since there are so no one seems to do a great job of tabulating things and many things can impact how crime statistics are determined when dealing with illegal immigrants. For instance, some criminals who are border jumpers are simply deported if they are caught by the Border Patrol, but only if they aren't caught in the process of committing a crime, thus they aren't added into the tabulation for criminal statistics (if the Border Patrol does catch them in the act though, then they are arrested, but even then during the whole trial process, they could be deported at any time). Making the issue even murkier is that when looking the immigrant prison populations, there is no clear data on how many of those are illegal immigrants, non-immigrants (foreigners that intended on a brief visit, but end up in jail) and legal immigrants. Plus, you get states like Arizona that pass hostile legislation that makes it even less likely for illegal immigrants to come forward on matters relating to crime (be they a witness or a victim). Finally, there's also the issue in the US where some of our PDs are pretty fucking vile, I mean if a legal black resident can get gunned down by a cop, I kind of doubt that the undocumented immigrant would even want to approach any cops like that since they have even less protections. It's probably safe to say that illegal immigration impact on general crime rates is a negative, that isn't well quantified and may never be well quantified. This is an angle that becomes easier to argue for when looking at how drug trafficking and gang violence are impacted by the status quo aka how organized shitheads exploit vulnerable populations; especially, when we start looking at illegal human trafficking.
-People illegally entering the US are blamed for environment degradation of public lands. Most of this tends to be in the form of trash left during the trips across the border. They have also been suspected of causing a number of major wild fires. Granted this is more environmental than either social or economic, I do feel it's a tidbit worth knowing.
I'm aware the above might make me seem anti-immigrant, but I'd argue the above is probably very effective for arguing why immigration reform needs to happen because a growing population of second class citizens is not healthy. Pragmatically, I think some form of amnesty is probably the best way going forward; especially, when we're dealing with people that were brought here illegally at a young age, and thus really didn't get a say.
Finally, before we get to 2014 events centered around this issue. Let's take a quick look at events leading up to this point.
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 is passed. Note how this signed by President Ronald Reagan.
Immigration Act of 1990 is passed, this one was signed by President George Bush Sr. Update to the Immigration Act of 1965 and considered a step forward on immigration.
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, this one was signed by Bill Clinton. Regarded as a step backwards and opened up more avenues to deport immigrants. One such example was how the law was used retroactively, this was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2001. This also led to a situation where the immigration service could hold deportees indefinitely, but this too was reigned in by the Supreme Court in 2011. Two aspects of this law that are thought to be unconstitutional, have yet to be challenged. One is the use of secret evidence and the other has to deal with people that renounce their citizenship to avoid taxes.
The events of 9/11 arguable had a negative impact on immigration reform. Not surprising given how many bad bills came into law because people wanted something, anything done to stop potential terrorists and were unwilling to think things through.
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. This bill ultimately failed because cloture in the Senate could not be reached. The bill was a compromise between providing a pathway to citizenship for the roughly 12 million illegal immigrants residing the US at the time and beefing up security on the border. It should be noted that this bill included most of the Dream Act. Reid was the sole sponsor of the bill in the Senate and President George Bush supported the bill. The bill was criticized from the right pretty much what people would expect, rewarding people for violating the law by giving them a pathway to citizenship. The left didn't like the bill either feeling that it was unfair to limit visiting visas to "nuclear families" and it's point based guest worker program would likely create a class or workers with no benefits. It was also pointed out that the program required guest workers to return home for a year, which would like just result in them becoming illegal immigrants.
Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013. This has been the most recent bill in Congress that has attempted to remedy the issue. This managed to get out of the Senate with 62 votes, so bipartisan support. Likely would have passed the House if that asshole Boehner had allowed it to get a vote, but he refused (fuck gridlock in Congress) and said he wanted a piecemeal approach (which wouldn't have fucking worked, nor is really practical). The bill like the 2007 one included many elements of the Dream Act; however, it lacked many of the elements that the left found distasteful, while still retaining measure to beef up border security. The right's criticism of the bill is pretty much what it was to the 2007 bill. On the left side of things, the two most controversial aspects of the bill are the E-Verify System and giving corporations a bone they don't need, in the form of raising the cap on one visa, that is essentially allowing them to reduce costs at the expense of American works.
This summer, we had the crisis of the large number of unaccompanied minors show up at the southern boarder. A crisis where member of Congress, particularly ones that have kept it gridlocked, suggested that Obama should use executive action to address the crisis.
Dream Act
What you though I wasn't going to give this it's own section, it was only mentioned in two different bills discussed earlier.
This was initially a bill introduced in 2001. The goal of the bill was to provide a pathway of citizenship for minors who were brought into the US illegally. To be eligible they needed to meet the following (source):
Also taken from the above source:
Not surprising, the right doesn't like with the tired ass excuse that it would encourage people to disobey the law. Me personally, I think it's a practical approach to an issue. A large group of second class citizens is not healthy for the country because it's going to cause problems. Also it's not really fair to punish people for the actions of their parents, when they were too young to really do anything about it. It's kind insane that someone that was brought here 16 or younger gets the same vitriol directed as them, as what a drug cartel gangster gets. The former likely got little to no say in the matter and even if they did object or know what they were doing was illegal (which I doubt many did), what do people expect them to do?
So this brings to the events of yesterday.
So the lack of action from Congress, especially, the one that is about has finally forced Obama to resort to executive action to try and manage the issue as best as possible. Hint, we'd be better served by Congress doing it's fucking job, but that isn't looking like it'll happen anytime soon, so Obama is stuck using what tools he has at his disposal.
(sorry video has some dumb talking heads, jump to about 1:40 if you don't want to hear them. President's speech also ends at about 16:30, so if you don't care for the analysis, you can cut the video there).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ARxF9fP7Vho
Transcript for those that can't or don't want to watch the video.
So Mill, what happens if the the Republican response to this action is to shutdown the government again or start the process of impeachment. Well Pinky, we'll do what we started doing ever since the last government shutdown. We'll start the appropriate "A Goddamn Separate Thread For Your Discussion of X!" We sure as hell aren't going to discuss either of those two things here, if they happen because of this.
If there is anything that people feel I should add to the OP. Please feel free to PM me about it.
What this thread is for:
1. Discussion of US immigration policy and it effects, specifically how it relates to:
-Economics
-Social impacts
-While I want this to be more than how it impacts elections, the impact it could have on election demographics is acceptable discussion (just don't turn this into the general US 2016 elections thread)
2. Any proposed or enacted government action on the matter.
3. Any noteworthy political developments that are are result of current US immigration policy. Though as stated earlier, certain ones will get rolled off into their own thread if they do happen.
4. How our immigration system is broken.
What this thread is not for:
1. Discussion of immigration in other countries.
2. General shitting on the GOP, Democrats or any political figure in a way that has no relation to US immigration policy.
3. General discussion of the 2016 political races in the US (we've already got a thread for the Presidential stuff and people can make another for anything else).
4. I'll stress this is a discussion of US immigration policy. It is not a discussion on how people feel about illegal immigrants as people. (People are free to express their opposition towards something like the Dream Act and even use the justification, that I was ridiculing the right for using. They can bring up the negative impacts of illegal immigration. So yes, people can do constructive criticism of what would be deemed pro-illegal immigrant policies, while being civil about it. I hope we don't have issues and that I'm being overly cautious, but I'd rather preempt some potential BS; especially, given the nature of this thread).
5. Anything else that has nothing to do with US immigration policy and it's effects that the above four points don't cover.
First let's have a look at some some figure.
-Pew estimates that population of undocumented immigrants was around 11.7 million as of March 2012. Believe it or not the population peaked at 12.2 million in 2007. In 1993, this population was estimated to be about 3.5 million. (source)
-The number of apprehensions by the US Border Patrol, along the Mexico border rose through 1990 until they peaked in 2000 with that year having 1.7 million apprehensions. The number of apprehensions then dropped somewhat from 2001-2007. In 2007 they dropped dramatically. In 2012 this number increased modestly, but interestingly enough the increase seems to be from non-Mexicans, while the apprehension of Mexicans at the border continued to decline. (see source provided in the above bullet).
I figure the above has some the most salient figures to consider for future immigration policy. It gives us a rough idea of the total number of people in the US illegally. The second bullet is big because almost all opposition to reform, always sites a need to increase the US border security along the Mexican border (note how it rarely, if ever, talks about such a need along the Canadian border, the coasts, our various ports or people just failing to leave when their visa expires).
Now Lets talk about some of the economic and social impacts of illegal immigration.
-It's believed that illegal immigration has a harmful effect on wages, in sectors that are impacted, since that gives scummy employers a pool of workers that are willing to work for less or they can just flat out fuck them over, since the undocumented immigrant can't really go to the authorities. As much as I hate the "they're taking our jobs" line, there does seem to be some evidence that they do take jobs from certain kinds legal residents. They typical take low skilled and low paying jobs and impacts populations where the high school dropout rate is high.
-It's estimated that undocumented workers pay 7 billion dollars a year in Social Security. (source)
-CBO has found that the taxes generated from illegal immigrants do no offset the costs of the social services they use from local and state governments. Though it's believed the impact that these individuals have on state and local budgets is modest. (source)
-Looking through crime is kind of murky data point, since there are so no one seems to do a great job of tabulating things and many things can impact how crime statistics are determined when dealing with illegal immigrants. For instance, some criminals who are border jumpers are simply deported if they are caught by the Border Patrol, but only if they aren't caught in the process of committing a crime, thus they aren't added into the tabulation for criminal statistics (if the Border Patrol does catch them in the act though, then they are arrested, but even then during the whole trial process, they could be deported at any time). Making the issue even murkier is that when looking the immigrant prison populations, there is no clear data on how many of those are illegal immigrants, non-immigrants (foreigners that intended on a brief visit, but end up in jail) and legal immigrants. Plus, you get states like Arizona that pass hostile legislation that makes it even less likely for illegal immigrants to come forward on matters relating to crime (be they a witness or a victim). Finally, there's also the issue in the US where some of our PDs are pretty fucking vile, I mean if a legal black resident can get gunned down by a cop, I kind of doubt that the undocumented immigrant would even want to approach any cops like that since they have even less protections. It's probably safe to say that illegal immigration impact on general crime rates is a negative, that isn't well quantified and may never be well quantified. This is an angle that becomes easier to argue for when looking at how drug trafficking and gang violence are impacted by the status quo aka how organized shitheads exploit vulnerable populations; especially, when we start looking at illegal human trafficking.
-People illegally entering the US are blamed for environment degradation of public lands. Most of this tends to be in the form of trash left during the trips across the border. They have also been suspected of causing a number of major wild fires. Granted this is more environmental than either social or economic, I do feel it's a tidbit worth knowing.
I'm aware the above might make me seem anti-immigrant, but I'd argue the above is probably very effective for arguing why immigration reform needs to happen because a growing population of second class citizens is not healthy. Pragmatically, I think some form of amnesty is probably the best way going forward; especially, when we're dealing with people that were brought here illegally at a young age, and thus really didn't get a say.
Finally, before we get to 2014 events centered around this issue. Let's take a quick look at events leading up to this point.
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 is passed. Note how this signed by President Ronald Reagan.
- required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status.
- made it illegal to hire or recruit illegal immigrants knowingly.
- legalized certain seasonal agricultural illegal immigrants.
- legalized illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language.
Immigration Act of 1990 is passed, this one was signed by President George Bush Sr. Update to the Immigration Act of 1965 and considered a step forward on immigration.
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, this one was signed by Bill Clinton. Regarded as a step backwards and opened up more avenues to deport immigrants. One such example was how the law was used retroactively, this was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2001. This also led to a situation where the immigration service could hold deportees indefinitely, but this too was reigned in by the Supreme Court in 2011. Two aspects of this law that are thought to be unconstitutional, have yet to be challenged. One is the use of secret evidence and the other has to deal with people that renounce their citizenship to avoid taxes.
The events of 9/11 arguable had a negative impact on immigration reform. Not surprising given how many bad bills came into law because people wanted something, anything done to stop potential terrorists and were unwilling to think things through.
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. This bill ultimately failed because cloture in the Senate could not be reached. The bill was a compromise between providing a pathway to citizenship for the roughly 12 million illegal immigrants residing the US at the time and beefing up security on the border. It should be noted that this bill included most of the Dream Act. Reid was the sole sponsor of the bill in the Senate and President George Bush supported the bill. The bill was criticized from the right pretty much what people would expect, rewarding people for violating the law by giving them a pathway to citizenship. The left didn't like the bill either feeling that it was unfair to limit visiting visas to "nuclear families" and it's point based guest worker program would likely create a class or workers with no benefits. It was also pointed out that the program required guest workers to return home for a year, which would like just result in them becoming illegal immigrants.
Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013. This has been the most recent bill in Congress that has attempted to remedy the issue. This managed to get out of the Senate with 62 votes, so bipartisan support. Likely would have passed the House if that asshole Boehner had allowed it to get a vote, but he refused (fuck gridlock in Congress) and said he wanted a piecemeal approach (which wouldn't have fucking worked, nor is really practical). The bill like the 2007 one included many elements of the Dream Act; however, it lacked many of the elements that the left found distasteful, while still retaining measure to beef up border security. The right's criticism of the bill is pretty much what it was to the 2007 bill. On the left side of things, the two most controversial aspects of the bill are the E-Verify System and giving corporations a bone they don't need, in the form of raising the cap on one visa, that is essentially allowing them to reduce costs at the expense of American works.
This summer, we had the crisis of the large number of unaccompanied minors show up at the southern boarder. A crisis where member of Congress, particularly ones that have kept it gridlocked, suggested that Obama should use executive action to address the crisis.
Dream Act
What you though I wasn't going to give this it's own section, it was only mentioned in two different bills discussed earlier.
This was initially a bill introduced in 2001. The goal of the bill was to provide a pathway of citizenship for minors who were brought into the US illegally. To be eligible they needed to meet the following (source):
- Not have entered the United States on a non-immigrant Visa.
- Have proof of having arrived in the United States before age 16.[16]
- Have proof of residence in the United States for at least five consecutive years since their date of arrival.
- If male, have registered with the Selective Service.
- Be between the ages of 12 and 35 at the time of bill enactment.
- Have graduated from an American high school, obtained a GED, or been admitted to an institution of higher education.
- Be of good moral character.
Also taken from the above source:
During the first six years, qualifying people would be granted "conditional" status and would be required to (a) graduate from a two-year community college or (b) complete at least two years towards a four-year degree or (c) serve two years in the US military. After this six-year period, those who meet at least one of these three conditions would be eligible to apply for permanent resident status. During this six-year conditional period, they would not be eligible for federal higher education grants such as Pell grants but they would be able to apply for student loans and work study.
If they have met all of the conditions at the end of the 6-year conditional period, they would be granted permanent residency, which would eventually allow them to become U.S. citizens. It is not known how many of those eligible would go on to complete the further requirements. One organization estimated that only 7,000–13,000 college students nationally can fulfill the further obligations. A different analysis found that over 2 million individuals could benefit under the Act.
Not surprising, the right doesn't like with the tired ass excuse that it would encourage people to disobey the law. Me personally, I think it's a practical approach to an issue. A large group of second class citizens is not healthy for the country because it's going to cause problems. Also it's not really fair to punish people for the actions of their parents, when they were too young to really do anything about it. It's kind insane that someone that was brought here 16 or younger gets the same vitriol directed as them, as what a drug cartel gangster gets. The former likely got little to no say in the matter and even if they did object or know what they were doing was illegal (which I doubt many did), what do people expect them to do?
So this brings to the events of yesterday.
So the lack of action from Congress, especially, the one that is about has finally forced Obama to resort to executive action to try and manage the issue as best as possible. Hint, we'd be better served by Congress doing it's fucking job, but that isn't looking like it'll happen anytime soon, so Obama is stuck using what tools he has at his disposal.
(sorry video has some dumb talking heads, jump to about 1:40 if you don't want to hear them. President's speech also ends at about 16:30, so if you don't care for the analysis, you can cut the video there).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ARxF9fP7Vho
Transcript for those that can't or don't want to watch the video.
So Mill, what happens if the the Republican response to this action is to shutdown the government again or start the process of impeachment. Well Pinky, we'll do what we started doing ever since the last government shutdown. We'll start the appropriate "A Goddamn Separate Thread For Your Discussion of X!" We sure as hell aren't going to discuss either of those two things here, if they happen because of this.
If there is anything that people feel I should add to the OP. Please feel free to PM me about it.
What this thread is for:
1. Discussion of US immigration policy and it effects, specifically how it relates to:
-Economics
-Social impacts
-While I want this to be more than how it impacts elections, the impact it could have on election demographics is acceptable discussion (just don't turn this into the general US 2016 elections thread)
2. Any proposed or enacted government action on the matter.
3. Any noteworthy political developments that are are result of current US immigration policy. Though as stated earlier, certain ones will get rolled off into their own thread if they do happen.
4. How our immigration system is broken.
What this thread is not for:
1. Discussion of immigration in other countries.
2. General shitting on the GOP, Democrats or any political figure in a way that has no relation to US immigration policy.
3. General discussion of the 2016 political races in the US (we've already got a thread for the Presidential stuff and people can make another for anything else).
4. I'll stress this is a discussion of US immigration policy. It is not a discussion on how people feel about illegal immigrants as people. (People are free to express their opposition towards something like the Dream Act and even use the justification, that I was ridiculing the right for using. They can bring up the negative impacts of illegal immigration. So yes, people can do constructive criticism of what would be deemed pro-illegal immigrant policies, while being civil about it. I hope we don't have issues and that I'm being overly cautious, but I'd rather preempt some potential BS; especially, given the nature of this thread).
5. Anything else that has nothing to do with US immigration policy and it's effects that the above four points don't cover.
+12
Posts
But that would require congress to do something other then be a useless sack of crap so good luck ever seeing it happen.
I dunno, immigration is my single-voter issue and I'm happy about what Obama has done as a human rights issue, in terms of economics, in terms of what I understand is possible; I wish more would be done and I wish that more could be done
to me at least, immigration restrictions being relaxed is about as up there in human welfare importance as I can see, only possibly outweighed by global warming; even small steps in the right direction, which I view the latest developments as, are welcome
I don't mind one bit the administration essentially deciding criminal aliens are much more priority than non-criminal ones. Limited resources, etc. I would prefer reform of some nature aimed at holding businesses more accountable for profiting off cheap undocumented labor. A lot like aiming stiffer penalties to illegal drug sellers and traffickers vs a simple user/possessor.
* Some votes are literally bought and paid for and some just stump for opposition views that aid them politically.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
This strikes me as completely crazy, and flies in the face of the fact that everyone in America is the child of an immigrant (somewhere up the line).
"Ok, great, we're in, now let's slam the door behind us."
I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob.
Personally I see them as two separate issues. But there is a natural political tendency to conflate the two.
The author is so, so close to getting it.
'Hey, Obama says illegal immigrants are putting America first... but really they're just ordinary people like the rest of us, trying to help their families.'
'Illegal immigrants are poor, with limited skills and education. But giving them legal status won't raise their wages that much.'
'It's wrong to tear families apart by deporting the parents of US citizens. So if we just did away with birthright citizen, we wouldn't have to separate them--we could simply deport entire families. They'd be together! Somewhere else.'
'If we don't want a permanent American underclass, we're going to have to spend money helping to educate them. And that would mean higher taxes.'
'Most illegal immigrants don't receive government services. Coincidentally, there's a lot of hunger in this country. If we made them citizens, wouldn't they be entitled to food?'
It's like, yes, that's the color blue, yes, that thing above us is the sky--what's that you say? No, the sky's not blue. Sure, illegal immigrants are suffering, and sure, we could help them, and sure, we probably should, but what about taxes? Some unspecified amount of taxes that I'm not necessarily against but I'm definitely against Obama not talking about what those taxes would be.
Ugh.
No, actually. No state will be undone by its population sinking, unless its so low that it can no longer exploit its resources. We are not anywhere near that point.
In general, things get better as populations fall, since there are more real resources per person. Though this discounts the effect on R&D (though i doubt we would see a significant one)
as a dude who will never compete for employment with low-skilled or semi-skilled immigrants but will benefit as a consumer from high competition in the low-wage space, it's easy for me to support increased (low-skill) immigration.
i don't think this is directly driving the republican intransigence to immigration, but it's definitely true that low-skilled workers feel squeezed by working immigrants, and i think this drives the debate in ways that people are kind of avoiding. it's not like progressives have had much of a track record at getting help to these people - why would they be trusted here?
Have you looked at Japan recently?
Isn't it a two way street though? Legally recognizing the immigrants would force employers to pay them at least minimum wage, instead of letting them undercut legal workers with illegals working under minimum wage.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Japan's problems are not because of a lack of population growth(See, Krugman's work on this subject). Changing population trajectories can cause temporary problems, but none permanent. Lower population growth is almost always explicitly good.
The risks of low population growth are inadequate military(I.E. can't defend yourself against someone who is growing) and potential lack of scientists/Researchers. None of which we would experience in the U.S.
Fake edit: Unless you're super rich, then the higher wages mean that your work is comparatively less valuable.
Interesting.
There's a bit of a thing over here in regards of the government pension payouts and medicare costs growing becuase of an aging population costing more and not having an increase in the tax base to substain it.
Is this not a big on an issue as they're making it out to be?
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
No. It ends. The "aging population" only happens because we had a population boom at one point. After which those people die and we return to a steady ratio of retirees to young people.
At the end of the day, the fewer people there are the higher the marginal value of work is (basically because you're not over saturating your resources/capital) which means higher wages (for those at the bottom end of the scale). Basically as we add more people we don't add more productive jobs, we add the least productive jobs. Similarly as we add more people Wealth/Person necessarily decreases.
This is all within reason. If you population drops far enough you're going to have problems sustaining your infrastructure and your capital base, and there are other advantages to having a large society (largely dealing with the fact that consolidation is efficient) but our problems related to that area don't really have to do with the size of our population but rather our willingness to tax and our unwillingness to actually implement collective solutions
edit: I am not arguing that we should limit immigration because it would be better for us. It probably would not (expenditures to keep people out, effect on labor/capital power structure would benefit capital more). But the closed system statics of population should be pretty clear, low population growth is good.
You solve the government pension issue by actually funding the damn pension while the retirees were still working, instead of writing IOUs out, and pushing the funding problem onto your grandkids, which is what currently happens. This asinine method of funding pensions is why pretty much everyone, including most local governments, have gone to a 401k or 403b setup.
Remove the social security payroll cap. Problem solved. Where do I collect my fat consulting check?
Also, the reason average life expectancy keeps going up is not so much because of extending old age, but because of vast improvements in infant mortality. So raising the retirement age is a less than ideal solution.
Social Security needs a wall put in between itself and the grubby hands of Congress. Any time the fund is going to look remotely healthy someone will be elected on the promise of either cutting taxes or expanding services and will use it as a slush fund to do either without doing the inverse (cutting services or raising taxes, depending on the promise.
Its almost entirely why municipal and state pensions were put to the test these last few years (with an exception for certain funds that were scammed by the likes of Bernie Madoff) and if this were the right thread for it I could write a small novel on why New Jerseys pension funds are in some trouble (even with the last few decades of chicanery they are still pretty well off and will be salvageable).
Shortsightedness was essential for humans to survive day to day back before we had figured out to not poop while walking. Its been our greatest enemy ever since. Or at least the Republicans greatest enemy, since I think in the next few months they are going to run out of toes to shoot off when it comes to courting the hispanic vote and they're going to have to start aiming higher up.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
If anyone wants an example look at the restaurant industry. Dishwashers, bus boys, line cooks- jobs that were once held by citizens are now increasingly being held by illegal immigrants, because they'll work long hours for very low pay. Illegal immigration does have an effect on low-skilled workers and the working poor, and it is not a good effect.
It's not that crazy, given that one of the reasons that people immigrate is to get away from the people in their original country. If they're followed by a bunch of others, then what was the point?
and the restaurant owner is a US Citizen to boot.
We need to learn how to grow an economy without growing a population, otherwise the whole world will be in Japan's position in a hundred years time.
Anyway, Japan isn't so badly off. They are prosperous, educated, and live well. Many countries would be happy to swap places with them. In ten years, with the right leadership, they could be the new miracle economy. Who knows?