TexasCHLforum.com

equin wrote: How did I misquote? I simply copied and pasted what you wrote, which I thought was a point very well taken.

You actually quoted me... Sometimes quotes within quotes get confusing and you have to edit....

bagman45 wrote:The problem is, if this mess passes, when "we" finally decide it's time to take our country back, "they" will be armed and fighting against "us".

How is passing this bill or any other bill going to result in the arming of anyone?

baldeagle wrote: By your logic, California homes should be even cheaper than Texas homes, but we all know that's obviously not true. (California has far more illegals than Texas does.)

So lets qualify that. I know Texas real estate well. I don't know California real estate very well. Is it the home construction that costs so much or the piece of land that the construction sits on? If it's the land, my argument still holds value... So to be specific, I'm indicating that the cost of labor for construction is far less in the states with large illegal populations.

baldeagle wrote:A combination of available land and lending regulations have kept housing prices comparatively low and helped Texas avoid the real estate depression that dragged down many other state economies.

So that indicates that it's the cost of land in California that's so expensive, not the labor rate...

baldeagle wrote:
The net effect on the economy of illegals (both contribution to and demand from) is essentially neutral.

I don't argue that point. I was merely pointing out that there is a significant contribution to the economy as well as a drag... There sure are lots of people screaming that illegals are dragging the economy down via typical political rhetoric and I hear very few arguments that address the reality of what they contribute to the economy. My point is simply - I've seen no valid quantification of net gain or net loss, but I guarantee that getting them all out and securing the border 98%+ will hit all of us in our pockets significantly...

baldeagle wrote:There are places in the United States where illegal immigration has big effects (both positive and negative). But economists generally believe that when averaged over the whole economy, the effect is a small net positive. Harvard's George Borjas says the average American's wealth is increased by less than 1 percent because of illegal immigration.

Again, this supports my argument that the economic impact of illegals isn't a economic sink-hole.

baldeagle wrote:Since the basis of your argument is so flawed, your solutions must be as well.

I'm not sure I follow you there... you and I are pretty in-line on the issues above. If you don't like my solution, I accept that... But it's a solution that addresses the needs of the majority and has an economic upside.

Jumping Frog wrote: However, I am not willing to even seriously discuss policy options until the border is first sealed and made secure. Stop the inflow first. Then we can discuss what to do with all the people that want to immigrate and the people who are already here illegally.

Until the border is secure, all other conversation is a deliberate and intentional farce.

I disagree with you. We're not serious about enforcing the laws that are currently on the books, so why should we spend Billions more on border security if we're going to allow the illegals that are over here work out in the open?

The bottom line is that there are some major political players that need the labor of illegals. Securing the border isn't in their best interest. They're farmers. They're home builders. Basically take your pick of any low-skilled labor field in the USA and it's in those businesses best interest to keep the illegal labor flowing. These interests fill the pockets of political campaigns and although no one wants to talk about it, it's the real reason why we're not doing anything other than token prosecutions of employers. It's the reason why on any given day I can point out 30 illegals waiting for work. If I could point out 30 prostitutes waiting for work, we'd do something about it.

We're not serious about solving this issue as we openly allow the employment of illegals. Want to spend my tax dollars (and increase our deficit)? Start enforcing the laws that we've got.

I'm not pro-illegal, but the reality is:
1) Our economy will drastically change, especially in Texas if illegal labor isn't an option. Ever wonder why a home here costs $200k and the same thing in the NE runs $450k+
2) Illegals contribute to our economy massively. It's hard to quantify this contribution. Is it a net gain compared to the drag on the "free services" that they can get? I suspect it is, but it's a moot point as you can't exactly put metrics on illegal activity.

My solution - and yea, I have a solution here:
1) Accept that we can't change it without massive spend on thousands of miles of border and a real impact on our economy. The increase in taxes required to cover it and the increase in costs of goods and services would hit everyone. More security = more taxes. That's just reality.
2) Implement a real guest worker program. These people are paying $4000-$7000 to get into Texas via illegal means. Lets charge them that money at the border (revenue gain), tax their wages, and make it so they can go back. Lets make it so they have to go back. Use the revenue gain for background checks and increased border security.
3) As part of the guest worker program, we stabilize medical emergencies, but we don't subsidize lifestyle. Children born here under the guest worker program don't become citizens automatically.

The result is a win for everyone: It serves the political interests, it increases border security, and it helps our economy rather than further hurting it...