**** Elections thread *****

[wufwugy]

So you're against gun ownership, now?

What I said doesn't suggest that.

Or what, you think the appropriate punishment for all crimes is life in prison or capital punishment?

What I said doesn't suggest that.

Americans who have been photographed with guns and have been in gangs and imprisoned eventually get out of prison and are let back directly into the USA.
They can swear that they are not reformed and that they will commit more crimes and we still let them out of prison because their sentence for the crimes they were caught committing has been served.
This is called American justice.
You against that, too?

Derived from premise my words didn't suggest.

What are you saying? That you should be the arbiter of who has which needs?

Not suggested by what I said.

Those refugees are criminals, and those are 2 separate issues.

Importing criminals is not a separate issue from importing criminals.

I thought Saudi Arabia was a hotbed of evil and iniquity to you? How is having them on board a plus to you?

Because reality.

@wuf:
No judicial system is perfect. Some innocents will be wrongfully punished. Some guilty will be wrongfully set free.
How shall we handle our imperfections?

How many innocent Americans should be imprisoned to prevent any guilty Americans from eluding the system?
How many guilty Americans should be acceptably allowed to be free, so that we minimize the imprisonment of innocents?

Where do you strike balance? Because assuming that you can have a perfect judicial system is fantasy.


***
Personally, I'd prefer to err on the side of letting a few criminals be free than risk depriving innocents of their rights.
But then, I'm no coward who thinks it's the gov't's job to coddle me with safety.
Whatever Ben Franklin meant, I'm not interested in trading my essential liberties to purchase a bit of security. I'm certainly not interested in trading anyone else's essential liberties on my behalf.

I'm not sure why this is directed at me. How is this related to trying to import fewer terrorists?

[MadMojoMonkey]

What I said doesn't suggest that.

What I said doesn't suggest that.

Derived from premise my words didn't suggest.

Then what is your point with this observation?
"I've seen multiple instances of the same men caught in photos with firearms in a gang AND admitted as refugees in Europe."

I thought you were saying this is bad. If you were, in fact, saying this is exactly appropriate, then I absolutely misunderstood you.

If you're saying it's bad, then based on what?
What is your actual premise, I mean.

Not suggested by what I said.

Then what do you mean with this observation?
"I've also seen a ton of photos of refugee masses made up of mostly robust, well-fed men, with very few women and children."

I can't find any motivation to say this if not to suggest that this is a problem.
If you're suggesting that it's a problem, then upon what basis do you posit such?

Importing criminals is not a separate issue from importing criminals.

Of course not.
Making a 1:1 equation of "refugee" to "criminal" is your mistake, here.

Depriving the society of the intelligence, innovation and hard work of non-criminal immigrants is the kind of economic problem I'd expect you to put more weight on than this.

Because reality.

Don't cop out.
Which aspect(s) of reality?

I'm not sure why this is directed at me. How is this related to trying to import fewer terrorists?

Because you're willing to stop all refugee immigration to nullify some of their bad behavior.
"How many innocents is acceptable to punish in the name of the guilty?" seems a core question to elucidate where you're coming from.

[wufwugy]

Depriving the society of the intelligence, innovation and hard work of non-criminal immigrants is the kind of economic problem I'd expect you to put more weight on than this.

Fantastic point. It's not what's going on in the "refugee" situation, however. The problems brought with them are far higher than normal. They include everything from economic drain to terrorism.

Because you're willing to stop all refugee immigration to nullify some of their bad behavior.
"How many innocents is acceptable to punish in the name of the guilty?" seems a core question to elucidate where you're coming from.

Entry to the US is a privilege. US residents being defended from enemies is a right. Smart immigration policy is smart. Extreme vetting and temporary banning until problems can be fixed is the least that can be done to ensure the outcomes are the best.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Fantastic point. It's not what's going on in the "refugee" situation, however. The problems brought with them are far higher than normal. They include everything from economic drain to terrorism.

This is a myopic POV for an economist to take, though, right?

Of course when impoverished, but well meaning and hard-working people need help there is an immediate and short-term economic drain. That's what it means to need help.
However, that help is short-lived and the immediate investment will yield solid ROI for decades if not generations, yeah?

Entry to the US is a privilege. US residents being defended from enemies is a right. Smart immigration policy is smart. Extreme vetting and temporary banning until problems can be fixed is the least that can be done to ensure the outcomes are the best.

Smart immigration needs to do both:
Maximize the number of innocent and productive immigrants
Minimize the number of criminal and non-productive immigrants

Harping on one side to the ignorance of the other is bad economic policy.

[BananaStand]

Depriving the society of the intelligence, innovation and hard work of non-criminal immigrants is the kind of economic problem I'd expect you to put more weight on than this.

Of all the pro-immigration arguments, this one seems to be the least compelling to me. Firstly, for every brain surgeon that comes here, we have many times that many people who come here and become a burden. Secondly, it doesn't follow logic that disallowing these people would "deprive" us of anything. Last I heard, unemployment, and it's more sinister cousin under-employment are rampant among recent college graduates. Seems like if there is a need for educated economic contributors....we should have plenty of our own.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Of all the pro-immigration arguments, this one seems to be the least compelling to me. Firstly, for every brain surgeon that comes here, we have many times that many people who come here and become a burden.

Source, please?

Secondly, it doesn't follow logic that disallowing these people would "deprive" us of anything. Last I heard, unemployment, and it's more sinister cousin under-employment are rampant among recent college graduates. Seems like if there is a need for educated economic contributors....we've got plenty of our own.

I'm not sure that's the same subject.
In my work experience (albeit limited) American's tend to over-value their own skillset and expect more money for performing the same tasks as an equally educated 1st generation immigrant. The mere opportunity to work w/o fear of random violence which could well come from the gov't is a blessing they tend to not forget, whereas it's all Americans have even known, so we don't understand the value.

I accept that's a weak and anecdotal argument, though. I can't be bothered to spend 30 minutes trying to figure out what to search for to see if there's any remotely credible study done on this. If anyone knows of any, let me know. I'll recant my position in a second if I'm wrong about it.

[BananaStand]

Source, please?

Is it not common knowledge that there are some 12 million illegal immigrants in this country? Are they not working in jobs that do not pay taxes? Are they not sending their kids to american schools? Are they not seeking free, cheap, or subsidized healthcare....or other entitlements?

What value does your average syrian refugee bring to the table? Half of them are women, so you know they are totally uneducated and probably can't even drive. How about a command of the english language?

C'mon man, you can't tell me that the majority of people who come to America are coming to contribute when it's sooooo easy for them to exploit.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Is it not common knowledge that there are some 12 million illegal immigrants in this country?

I doubt the number is common knowledge, but it's common knowledge that there are illegal immigrants, sure.
Let's not nitpick the number.

Are they not working in jobs that do not pay taxes? Are they not sending their kids to american schools? Are they not seeking free, cheap, or subsidized healthcare....or other entitlements?

Excellent questions. I don't know the answers.

I suspect that even in your worst case scenario, I'd be OK with the numbers. I think that by the letter of the law, they're breaking the law, but by the spirit of the law, they are honorable, hard working people who want educated kids with skills that provide them opportunities. Sounds like the makings of a healthy, American family. Let's not pick nits about inconsequential history. They're here, they're not breaking laws, they're working jobs and sending their kids to school. IF they're not paying income tax, they're still paying sales tax and cannot claim any gov't benefits, so probably a net gain on taxes.

Seeking entitlements is the most American thing I can think of.

What value does your average syrian refugee bring to the table?

Dunno. Lets appropriately vet some and let them in and see.

Half of them are women, so you know they are totally uneducated and probably can't even drive. How about a command of the english language?

You're joking, right? Like, since they aren't educated, what? They are uneducatable? Since they can't drive, they can't learn to drive?

Plenty of Americans don't speak English. This is irrelevant.

C'mon man, you can't tell me that the majority of people who come to America are coming to contribute when it's sooooo easy for them to exploit.

C'mon man, you can't tell me the majority of Americans are any different.

[BananaStand]

I suspect that even in your worst case scenario, I'd be OK with the numbers. I think that by the letter of the law, they're breaking the law, but by the spirit of the law, they are honorable, hard working people who want educated kids with skills that provide them opportunities. Sounds like the makings of a healthy, American family. Let's not pick nits about inconsequential history. They're here, they're not breaking laws, they're working jobs and sending their kids to school. IF they're not paying income tax, they're still paying sales tax and cannot claim any gov't benefits, so probably a net gain on taxes.

Alright, let's not get off the rails here. I'm not beating the "they're breaking the law" drum too hard. My original point, is that among these *ahem* 'hard working people', there are more lawnmowers than brain surgeons. I'm just asking, is that something America really needs? Would we really be 'deprived' without that? And when you move away from the extreme poles of examples, I think America has generation of eager accountants, lawyers, electricians, and whatever else ready to fill any open position.

I'm just not buying that "immigrants are part of the fabric of america" nonsense.

Seeking entitlements is the most American thing I can think of.

Unfortunately, that's a common perception. though if I could sum up the 2016 election I'd say "the people paying the bills in this country want a fucking discount". I think your'e going to see more money flow to the middle class over the next 4 to 8 years. That means there's less for poor people. They're gonna have to get jobs too.

Dunno. Lets appropriately vet some and let them in and see.

Well, if we're talking about refugees, we're talking about someone who wouldn't otherwise come to America. If they had the means, motivation, and something to offer, they would come as immigrants. Refugees are only on the move because they are forced. If they had skills that we really needed here....we'd have gone over there and got them.

You're joking, right? Like, since they aren't educated, what? They are uneducatable? Since they can't drive, they can't learn to drive?

Who pays to educate them?

Plenty of Americans don't speak English. This is irrelevant.

Are those people paying the bills in this country, or collecting a check?

C'mon man, you can't tell me the majority of Americans are any different.

Just because you piss on your own toilet seat doesn't mean you'd like it if I came over and did the same.

[BananaStand]

In my work experience (albeit limited) American's tend to over-value their own skillset and expect more money for performing the same tasks as an equally educated 1st generation immigrant.

I can't be bothered to spend 30 minutes trying to figure out what to search for to see if there's any remotely credible study done on this

I can't be bothered to search either. But....

If it was a regular practice for American businesses to pay immigrants less than natives....how long do you think it would take for someone to cry 'racism'.

[wufwugy]

Of all the pro-immigration arguments, this one seems to be the least compelling to me. Firstly, for every brain surgeon that comes here, we have many times that many people who come here and become a burden. Secondly, it doesn't follow logic that disallowing these people would "deprive" us of anything. Last I heard, unemployment, and it's more sinister cousin under-employment are rampant among recent college graduates. Seems like if there is a need for educated economic contributors....we should have plenty of our own.

I'm gonna back him up on this.

Markets are fundamentally about matching up resources in order to create new resources that could not be created without the matching. A good way of seeing this is in financial markets, which exist for the purpose of matching up people with investment capital (but not labor or intellectual capital) with people who have labor or investment capital (but not investment capital) in order to produce a new good or service. At the foundation of any type of market is the same principle.

When it comes to immigration, something like a really smart kid born in the Congo would be far more productive if he could find his way to Harvard than if he stayed in the Congo, and the entire world, particularly the US (where Harvard is) would benefit from this.

However, there is great difficulty in actually getting this right. A whole bunch of our immigration policy goes against this principle, and it needs to be fixed. The ways to fix it include rigorously screening for those who are most likely to adopt the American ethic, getting rid of welfare, and probably only importing immigrants that are more productive than average or if there is a demonstrated need. Each one of these elements is abused quite a bit these days.