Well now that the Leftists won in Greece lets see how yalls Utopia pans out

IMHO..that would cost more money than jobs it would save.

Competition is good right? Government telling business what to do and who to hire is bad right? At least that is what I have heard for the last thirty years! Originally Posted by WTF

In this instance, it is not good. Studies indicate that for every two deportables who take American jobs, one American is unemployed, and, overall, wages are lower for everyone. Taxing working citizens to provide social services for both unemployed Americans and for the deportables, while the deportables export their expendable income to their families in another country is not good.

Yeah, that has a lot to do with the Greek election, IBIdiot.

I especially like the part where you advocate closed borders all around.

Then there's the ever so credible qualifier, "studies indicate." Are you making shit up again, CORPY?

Some people just aren't comfortable unless they're isolated. Kinda like living in yo sister's basement.

Right, Bubbles?

In this instance, it is not good. Studies indicate that for every two deportables who take American jobs, one Americans is unemployed, and, overall, wages are lower for everyone. Taxing working citizens to provide social services for both unemployed American and for the deportables, while the deportables export their expendable income to their families in another country is not good.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

So competition was not good for the American worker?

You got X-Rays being read on the cheap in other countries...Is that a good or bad thing btw?

What with our wages stagnant and these other countries wages going up, what will happen at equilibrium?

http://www.theguardian.com/global-de...-debt-eurozone


Of the lessons from Latin America's experience, two stuck in my mind. First, when a debt crisis hits, the debt needs to be cut rapidly. The continually failing system to deal with debt crises – bailout loans and austerity – is a tool to protect the lenders, and shift all the burden onto debtor governments and their people. Several speakers suggested a debt restructuring mechanism is needed for governments, effectively a bankruptcy procedure for states, to make it easier for countries to default, reduce their debts, share the costs, and bring early recovery.

Second, debt crises come from foreign lending and borrowing in the "good times", whether by private companies, public sector, or both. Preventing financial crises requires far less lending and debt between countries. Griffith-Jones pointed out that after the second world war the banks and financial sector were controlled by a global system of regulations, and there were hardly any debt crises until the system was broken up in the 1970s.

Yeah, that has a lot to do with the Greek election, IBIdiot.

I especially like the part where you advocate closed borders all around.

Then there's the ever so credible qualifier, "studies indicate." Are you making shit up again, CORPY?

Some people just aren't comfortable unless they're isolated. Kinda like living in yo sister's basement.

Right, Bubbles? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Have a 7th grader read and explain Friedman's book to you, you Mussulman-luvin, Hitler worshipping, lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM, you might make out the "interconnectedness."

So competition was not good for the American worker?

You got X-Rays being read on the cheap in other countries...Is that a good or bad thing btw?

What with our wages stagnant and these other countries wages going up, what will happen at equilibrium?
Originally Posted by WTF

The constant influx of deportables has kept wages stagnant.

The constant influx of deportables has kept wages stagnant.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

But it has kept prices down too. Just like the X-Ray tech has kept down medical costs yet costs jobs and wage stagnation too. Shall we try and close that border too?

Have you read Friedmen's , "That Used To Be Us"?

But it has kept prices down too. Just like the X-Ray tech has kept down medical costs yet costs jobs and wage stagnation too. Shall we try and close that border too? Have you read Friedmen's , "That Used To Be Us"? No. Originally Posted by WTF

Any savings from low prices is offset by higher taxes to support the unemployed and to provide social services for the deportables.

Any savings from low prices is offset by higher taxes to support the unemployed and to provide social services for the deportables. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Ten Billion dollars does not seem to be the huge problem that illegal immigration is made out to be.

This is a very good discussion. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115100948305787940



But illegal immigration differs from legal immigration in several important respects. First, illegal immigrants tend to have low skill levels, which means they end up in jobs in agriculture, construction, household services, landscaping, low-end manufacturing, or restaurants and lodging. Employers in these industries (and consumers of the goods these industries produce) are primarily the ones who benefit from illegal immigration. In a recent study, Patricia Cortes, a graduate student at MIT, finds that U.S. cities that have higher larger immigrant inflows have lower prices for housekeeping, gardening, and other labor intensive services. Ten percent more immigration lowers prices for these services by about 1.3%.
Second, illegal immigrants, by virtue of their low income levels and their tenuous attachment to the legal economy, don't pay all that much in taxes. Yet their kids still attend school and their U.S.-born kids still get access to Medicare. What does this mean for the net fiscal consequences of illegal immigration? The Center for Immigration Studies, an anti-immigration think tank, estimates that the short-run net fiscal impact of illegal immigration is negative, on the order of $10 billion in 2002, or 0.09% of U.S. GDP in that year. This is not a big number.
As with immigration overall, what upsets people is not the aggregate impact of illegal immigration, which, as with legal immigration, seems to be more or less a wash. It is that the benefits of illegal immigration are enjoyed by one group -- the employers who hire them (and the consumers of their services) -- while the costs are incurred by other groups -- low-skilled workers and taxpayers in states where illegal immigrants reside.

Ten Billion dollars does not seem to be the huge problem that illegal immigration is made out to be.

This is a very good discussion. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115100948305787940

But illegal immigration differs from legal immigration in several important respects. First, illegal immigrants tend to have low skill levels, which means they end up in jobs in agriculture, construction, household services, landscaping, low-end manufacturing, or restaurants and lodging. Employers in these industries (and consumers of the goods these industries produce) are primarily the ones who benefit from illegal immigration. In a recent study, Patricia Cortes, a graduate student at MIT, finds that U.S. cities that have higher larger immigrant inflows have lower prices for housekeeping, gardening, and other labor intensive services. Ten percent more immigration lowers prices for these services by about 1.3%.
Second, illegal immigrants, by virtue of their low income levels and their tenuous attachment to the legal economy, don't pay all that much in taxes. Yet their kids still attend school and their U.S.-born kids still get access to Medicare. What does this mean for the net fiscal consequences of illegal immigration? The Center for Immigration Studies, an anti-immigration think tank, estimates that the short-run net fiscal impact of illegal immigration is negative, on the order of $10 billion in 2002, or 0.09% of U.S. GDP in that year. This is not a big number.
As with immigration overall, what upsets people is not the aggregate impact of illegal immigration, which, as with legal immigration, seems to be more or less a wash. It is that the benefits of illegal immigration are enjoyed by one group -- the employers who hire them (and the consumers of their services) -- while the costs are incurred by other groups -- low-skilled workers and taxpayers in states where illegal immigrants reside. Originally Posted by WTF

That last remark is telling. It says one group, a few employers who utilize deportable labor, benefits, while a second group, natives who find themselves unemployed and taxpayers who find themselves overburdened, suffer. In no manner is that 'wash'. The discomfited group, the unemployed and the taxpayers, is vastly larger than the first group.

Basically all Greece has done is applied for more credit cards to help pay off the ones that they couldn't afford in the first place. And they want an extension of payback on the new cards.

Somebody will loose in this deal, it's usually the taxpayers. But with one in four adults in Greece unemployed, there ain't a whole lot of them left.

Basically all Greece has done is applied for more credit cards to help pay off the ones that they couldn't afford in the first place. And they want an extension of payback on the new cards.

Somebody will loose in this deal, it's usually the taxpayers. But with one in four adults in Greece unemployed, there ain't a whole lot of them left. Originally Posted by Jackie S

The Greeks will continue to suffer, but they will insure the rest of Europe suffers as well: especially Germany.

That last remark is telling. It says one group, a few employers who utilize deportable labor, benefits, while a second group, natives who find themselves unemployed and taxpayers who find themselves overburdened, suffer. In no manner is that 'wash'. The discomfited group, the unemployed and the taxpayers, is vastly larger than the first group. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You forgot to mention consumers of said goods and services.Folks that buy labor intensive goods such as fruits and vegetables. Hard to argue that a large segment of this country does not benefit from lower food costs.

The Greeks will continue to suffer, but they will insure the rest of Europe suffers as well: especially Germany. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Germany will rue the day they joined the EU.

You forgot to mention consumers of said goods and services.Folks that buy labor intensive goods such as fruits and vegetables. Originally Posted by WTF

Like I said, any savings from low prices is offset by higher taxes to support the unemployed and to provide social services for the deportables. Conversely, having a greater number of Americans employed will expand the tax base. Money currently spent for social services for the unemployed can be redirected into maintaining this county's infrastructure: actually paying more people to do more work. Without a surfeit, created by deportables, in the labor market, wages will go up. Another benefit, employed Americans will actually spend most, if not all, of their income in this country. Many deportables send a large portion of their income to families in other countries; thus, take revenue out of the U.S. economy in addition to the public funds expended to provide social services for them.

Well maybe we can build a fence around Greece for Ralphey Boy sake!