Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Anti-Immigrant Trump Administration Kills Report That Says Immigrants Contributed Net $63 Billion Over Last 10 Years to Government Coffers



Trump administration officials, under pressure from the White House to provide a rationale for reducing the number of refugees allowed into the United States next year, rejected a study by the Department of Health and Human Services that found that refugees brought in $63 billion more in government revenues over the past decade than they cost, reports The New York Times.

The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found, according to NYT that refugees “contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government” between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. “Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion.”

Of course, the positive impact of immigrants would be dramatically greater if we allowed them to work but put up a welfare wall, instead of booting them from the country.

-RW  

17 comments:

  1. Not a surprising result at all. However, it should be noted that an individual’s net balance with the state only represents a fraction of his total impact on “society.” The amount is almost certainly dwarfed by the value that he provides directly to other individuals. (The latter is also a much more ambiguously positive contribution, since it’s dubious to claim that filling state coffers should be considered beneficial.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep. And being from Central California, I can tell you all about all those young white and black American guys out in the fields pickin'. That picture above says it all. Maybe some bohunk up in Nebraska can handle a thresher on his own, but who's gonna pick the fruits and vegetables in Cal. Texas and Florida if that wall goes up?

      Delete
  2. Not my argument but that of the build the wall advocates is that these immigrants are taking jobs from citizens at lower pay. By keeping them out the government would bring in more revenue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Alex

      That argument conflates unit pay with total pay.

      Delete
    2. Re: Alex,

      --- that of the build the wall advocates is that these immigrants are taking jobs from citizens at lower pay. ---

      You can counter that argument with this simple answer: tell me what American wants to do what an immigrant does. Some anti-immigration ideologues would want you to think that all immigrants are like the techies brought over with H1-B visas, while at the same time being dangerous MS13 gang bangers who come to the US for the freebies. There's no consistency in their attacks, only a series of talking points meant to scare little children and clueless Red Team voters.

      Delete
  3. Has Mr. Wenzel addressed the arguments of 1) ~50% of immigrants being on the dole over multiple generations, 2) 80%+ of Central/South American immigrants vote Dem or for bigger govt programs and 3) immigrant parents have way more children than natives? I'd like to hear how a good PPS-er would address these issues in today's political environment aka what should individuals do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re: David Ranallo,

      --- Has Mr. Wenzel addressed the arguments of 1) ~50% of immigrants being on the dole over multiple generations, ---

      Liar. It's obvious B.S.

      Perhaps you don't understand what a 'generation' means or how many years it measures.

      --- 80%+ of Central/South American immigrants ---

      Liar. Immigrants can't vote. If you're conflating American Citizens and immigrants, then you're a mendacious f*ck who shouldn't be taken seriously.

      Delete
    2. You cock sucking piece of shit. Even after gaining citizenship an immigrant is still an immigrant, db bastard

      Delete
  4. Does the report subtract the potential tax contributions of people like Kate Steinle who could have paid more into the system, but were murdered by illegal immigrants?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kate Steinle wasn’t murderered by a immigrant.

      Delete
    2. Sorry, I forget that you're anti-white. She was killed by the bullet fired from the gun being held by the illegal immigrant. It's only murder if the victim isn't white.

      Delete
    3. He was acquitted of murder and manslaughter by a jury. Maybe find a new poster child?

      Delete
    4. Nope, sorry. Maybe try coming up with a policy position that doesn’t require lying to justify.

      Delete
  5. The NYT does say that the report and conclusions were "leaked", which provides the administration an excuse to dismiss the report. Even so, the conclusions are consistent with the findings from an investigation made by the National Academy Of Scienced whoch reached a similar conclusion, that immigrants of all kinds contribute mote to the economy than what they 'take in' in terms of supposed 'benefits'.

    Robert, your argument that immigrants would contribute even more provided they had legal protection from arbitrary deportation and if there was a wall on welfare benefits is a sound one, but even considering the possibility that some immigrants receive benefits, itndoes not mean immigrants are passive recipients, unlike some of the native-born who receive welfare and accustom their cgildren to game the system. For instance, therr seems to be a veritable 'epidemic' of disabling ailments among many of the native-born as they use that justification to receive Social Security before their golden years. Do immigrants do the same? I don't think so.

    This doesn't mean immigrants are *better* people, only that what motivates immigrants to work harder is an interest in showing their worth, as they have more to lose if they don't than the native-born. Incentives do matter.

    ReplyDelete
  6. In net terms, illegals cost the taxpayer over $100 billion. Source:
    http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/352869-the-cost-of-illegal-immigration-to-taxpayers-is-growing

    ReplyDelete