Thread: Importing Poverty, Wm. Hawkins

Importing poverty
William Hawkins
June 20, 2007
The argument that illegal aliens have been needed to fill a labor shortage in the U.S. economy is not supported by the facts.



According to the Census Bureau, 14.3 percent of illegals work in manufacturing. Yet, manufacturing has lost more than 2 million jobs since 2000, with more jobs lost every month.



Hordes of American citizens would love to regain factory employment, as they have not been able to find comparably rewarding jobs elsewhere; but illegals have been hired in their place. Most illegals are in the low-end of the labor pool, where unemployment is higher than average and wages are declining, the opposite of what would happen in a market with a shortage. Even in the economy as a whole, real wages for 93 million nonsupervisory, private sector workers fell again in April.



Those in the business community who support immigration "reform" do so to further swell the number of available workers to generate a labor surplus that will keep wages in check. But such a course is not in the long-term best interests of most business owners any more than it is for Americans in general.



Firms that hire "cheap" illegal workers do so to gain a competitive advantage against firms that obey the law. Honest business owners are placed in the difficult position of having to choose between emulating the unlawful behavior of rivals or risking the loss of contracts to them. A system that creates this kind of ethical dilemma should not be "regularized" into law.



There is, however, no such thing as "cheap" labor in an advanced society like ours. The higher costs for health, education and welfare, not to mention crime control, from a large increase in the number of people living in poverty is substantial. This financial pressure is already undermining state and local governments, school systems and hospitals.



Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation concluded that the Senate amnesty bill "would be the largest expansion of the welfare state in 35 years." His research shows "the U.S. has imported poverty through immigration policies that permitted and encouraged the entry and residence of millions of low-skill immigrants." He puts the annual cost to taxpayers at $89 billion, which will increase sharply if more illegal aliens become eligible for aid under an amnesty.



Taxpayers end up subsidizing employers who hire low wage workers. While it is sometimes useful to subsidize programs such as scientific research, defense capabilities or public works, it is hard to see how restaurants, janitorial services or landscapers qualify as strategic industries. If people want extra services for their private enjoyment, from blueberries to theme parks, they should be willing to pay the full cost and not dump part of the burden on others.

The country does not advance by substituting "cheap labor" for technological progress. A study at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia by economist Ethan Lewis found "plants in areas experiencing faster less-skilled relative labor supply growth adopted automation technology more slowly, both overall and relative to expectations, and even de-adoption was not uncommon."


De-adoption of technology? There is no way to put a positive spin on that. Yet, Mr. Evans argues "Producers may anticipate future flows of less skilled immigrants by adopting less technology." New advances are called "labor-saving devices" for a reason.


Shortsighted decisions can undermine the long-term advancement of economic prosperity and national capabilities. Japan, with a very restrictive immigration policy and a static population, has plentiful capital and leads the world in robotics. In contrast, the most destitute places on the planet are awash in cheap labor. It is not the number of workers, but their productivity that determines living standards. The great achievement of America is to have elevated the working class to the middle class through innovation and investment.

The Senate proposal includes a guest workers program that is supposed to give preferences to those with more skills and work experience, but will it improve immigration or just continue the same dangerous pattern?


In a May 30 editorial, the Wall Street Journal protested the Senate vote "to halve the size of a guest-worker program for low-skilled workers." On June 6, the Senate voted to sunset the program in five years. If future guest workers are no more literate or productive than what has come in illegally, the program should not even last that long.


Importing poverty is also risky politically for broader business interests. The Service Employee International Union, which has expanded rapidly by recruiting low-wage immigrants, hailed last November's election results, claiming "By voting to change the leadership of Congress, and electing eight new pro-worker [i.e. Democratic] governors. ... more progressive voices were heard." Higher income taxes to finance social programs on a redistributive basis are at the top of SEIU's agenda.


Business stands to lose more in the long run from slower real economic growth and higher taxes, than from the deceptive, short-term gains from lower labor costs.


William Hawkins is senior fellow at the U.S. Business and Industry Council in Washington, D.C.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbc ... e=nextpage

Higher income taxes to finance social programs on a redistributive basis are at the top of SEIU's agenda.

This is what TOTALLY pisses me off!!! Why should I have to subsidize low-skilled workers? Geez...I struggled for 6 years to get through college...and it took me 15 years to pay off my student loans! Nobody gave me a free ride through college, nor did the government ever give me any free food or housing or medical care. When I couldn't afford it, I just did without. And for God's sake! I certainly didn't bring any children into this world when I clearly was barely surviving myself!!

But that was back then. Things are much better for me now. So my reward, now that I have a good-paying job and am out of student loan debt, is that I can't enjoy the fruits of my labor; rather, I have to help support the mass influx of poor people and their huge broods that have come into this country. And I have to do this while the rich fat-cat corporations just line their pockets with gold.

The real agenda for those backing the Sellout America Act, is the creation of a new slave class.

Those who profess to be concerned for the wellbeing of the illegal aliens themselves are covering a very dark secret. Why would anyone support legitimizing the exploitation of poor, uneducated, unskilled, peasants? Well, each of the different groups have their own agenda.

Who are the major players and what are their respective agendas?

First, the US Government is looking at shrinking tax revenues in the very near future, due to our aging population. The US has actually had negative population growth, among its core populace, for the past 30 years. The only reason that the US has shown a population increase for the past three decades is due to immigration, legal and illegal. It's the immigrants that have kept the public from recognizing that our population is actually shrinking. This is a major problem because throughout history any population that fails to maintain a replacement population disappears within 6 generations. The clock is ticking folks and we're already one generation into the decline. The process will accelerate and will become a major problem for our children, it will become the major issue for our grandchildren. It will be irreversable after that.

In addition the US Government has always had a love/hate relationship with our Constitution. It gets in the way sometimes, and the Government would like to be rid of it, or at least to lessen its importants. The problem is that the Constitution is part of our national culture. We used to be taught its principles in school. The Government dumbed down the schools but that didn't do enough to weaken the Constitution. That's because those of us who know the Constitution won't shut up about it. The younger generations have learned their rights from us.

So, a simple solution is to bring in large numbers of foreign born citizens. These folks know nothing of the Constitution or their rights. In their home countries their "rights" are whatever their government grants them. This is their culture. They have no tradition of rights or experience with a representative form of government. These people and their children will be easy prey for a Government that has grown too large and has become jealous of the freedoms that we enjoy.

The Democrat Party. The DNC used to have lots and lots of black voters who would not vote for a Republican no matter what the issue. This has been changing over the past 20 years and the DNC can no longer count on capturing virtually all of the black vote. Prominant black politicians in the Republican Party have made them aware that the "evil" Republicans are not much different from the Democrats. Once the voters see that their lives don't depend on keeping the Democrats in power, then control of the voting block is lost. Republicans have been capturing more and more of the black vote over the past 20 years especially in the South.

So, the solution for the DNC is to find another minority group that can be controllled and manipulated. This is done by paying lip service and a few token programs and bills. It just so happens that the hispanic population eclipsed the black population as the largest minority group in the Country at just the right time. The DNC is hoping that illegal immigration will deliver a new voting block to them.

The Leftists, or more acurately the Socialists and Communists, and there are millions of them. These guys are still mad at the US for winning the Cold War. They refuse to admit that the worldwide communist revolution has failed. They are intent on reviving their cause by causing a communist revolution in the US. The problem for them is that a well educated, well fed, middle class population has always rejected communism. So, the creation of a new class of people below the poverty level, who is uneducated and illiterate is essential to the survival of their goals. Illegal immigrants from Central and South America are the perfect solution to their problem. The injection of masive numbers of illegal immigrants hurts the US economy, lowers wages, and destabilized the social structure, creating the perfect climate for a workers revolution.

The Republican Party. The RNC has backed illegal immigration for years because of large campaign contributors, many of them major corporations, who have made billions exploiting illegal labor. The two driving factors in all politics are money and power. In this case follow the money.

Corporate interests, support illegal immigration because there are no checks and balances in place to protect the illegal laborer. He's paid off the books, paid substandard wages, with no benefits. Something that surprises many people is the fact that corporate benefits often cost a company far more than the salary that the company pays the individual. This is why contract labor has been increasing in the US over the past 40 years, a contractor doesn't share in the corporate benefit structure. It's doubly true of an illegal worker, since there is usually no SSN, FICA, or income tax withholding. Less money to pay, less paperwork, and less benefits. It's great deal for an employer willing to skirt the law.

Then there's the immigrants themselves. They of course see better pay, better working conditions, and little or no negative consequence to breaking the law. An illegal immigrant can make more money in a month or two in the US than they could make in a year in Mexico. Think about that. If there was a job in foreign country that would pay you 6-10 times what you make here, wouldn't you try to get it? Most of us would.

These are the major groups who are our opposition. Each has it's own reasons for wanting to continue the illegal immigration industry in this country. Each is willing to do whatever it take to get the results that they want. None of them care about the consequences, or the impact that their actions will have on the long term future of this country.