Thread: Why are African Americans brainwashed about illegal immigration?

And another thing. Black Americans need to open their eyes on how democrats are purposely keeping them dependent on welfare so they can secure their vote. Being on welfare, they are doomed to being poor for the rest of their lives. Democrats here in the Chicago area are bussing in an enormous amount of illegals to take jobs away from Americans, while they deprive Black people, and white people, but mostly black people, in this are from these jobs, while keeping Blacks dependent on welfare so they can just "sit down and shut up".

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

I would like to make a request to the moderators of this forum to make this thread a sticky. I think it's very important that African Americans know the truth about how democrats have been brainwashing them into supporting illegals, but hiding the truth from them on how African Americans are hurt the most from illegal immigration, by losing jobs to them. And not to mention how they come and suck up all the benefits that would normally go to very poor black and white people.

Your wish is our command. Good idea!

Originally Posted by Boomslang

Boomslang, what does this video have anything to do with the topic of this thread? I think you're insane.

Originally Posted by Jean

Your wish is our command. Good idea!

Thanks Jean!

Candace Owens: There Will Be a 'Major Black Exit' From the Democratic Party




Candace Owens said Thursday she believes the Democratic Party will see a "major exit" by black voters leading up to the 2020 presidential election.

The Turning Point USA communications director predicted that black men and women - not white middle-class women - will become the "most relevant vote" in the United States by 2020 because more and more African-Americans are hearing "different ideas" through digital and social media.

"There is going to be a major black exit from the Democrat Party and they are going to actually have to actually compete for their votes in 2020," Owens said on "Fox & Friends."

---

Owens said President Trump was absolutely correct in 2016 when he told black voters they had "nothing to lose" by supporting him over Hillary Clinton. She said Turning Point is working on a "major project" that will be announced in three weeks aimed at outreach to urban voters.

Kimberly Klacik@kimKBaltimore


Just watched a great segment on @foxandfriends with @RealCandaceO . The shift is noticeable. There will be many black people either voting republican in 2020 or not voting at all.
6:43 AM - Jul 5, 2018 · Middle River, MD

• 
  6,421
• 
  1,411 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy


She also reacted to a letter in which Black Women Leaders and Allies blasted Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi for their "failure to protect" Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) against attacks by Trump and his allies.

Waters drew the ire of Republicans last week when she called for her supporters to confront Trump administration officials in public. Owens said Waters deserved criticism and condemnation and this letter represents her supporters "playing the black card."

"The left created the black card and now they have to see what happens when you do something like this, when you say that a black woman cannot be criticized whatsoever despite what she does," said Owens, blasting Waters for "inspiring hatred" against the president and his supporters.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/07/0...tic-party-2020

In the last post I made on here, the video interview with Candace Owens, she says how illegal immigration negatively affects Black Americans more than any other group. Isn't this what I've been trying to say all along? Yes, yes it is.

Liberals say immigration enforcement is racist, but the group most likely to benefit from it is black men

By DAVE SEMINARAMAR 16, 2018 | 4:15 AM

A worker assembles an engine at Ford's Chicago Assembly Plant on June 9, 2015. (M. Spencer Green / Associated Press)

President Trump's election victory over Hillary Clinton seemed to herald a new era for border security and immigration enforcement. But his polarizing and occasionally ignorant comments about immigrants have handed his adversaries a convenient pretext for stymying compromise on immigration reform: racism.


Left-leaning advocacy groups and a host of Democrats all too often shy away from the specifics of the debate and instead lean on cries of bigotry, resorting to claims like that of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who has described Trump's approach to immigration reform as an effort to "make America white again."


Claims that immigration enforcement equals racism ignore the reality that the group most likely to benefit from a tougher approach to immigration enforcement is young black men, who often compete with recent immigrants for low-skilled jobs.


This dynamic played out recently at a large bakery in Chicago that supplies buns to McDonald's. Some 800 immigrant laborers, most of them from Mexico, lost their jobs last year after an audit by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The Cloverhill Bakery, owned by Aryzta, a big Swiss food conglomerate, had to hire new workers, 80% to 90% of whom are African American. According to the Chicago Sun Times, the new workers are paid $14 per hour, or $4 per hour more than the (illegal) immigrant workers.



In this case, and in many others, the beneficiaries of immigration enforcement were working-class blacks, who are often passed over for jobs by unscrupulous employers.


The labor force participation rate for adult black men has declined steadily since the passage of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which ushered in a new era of mass immigration. In 1973, the rate was 79%. It is now at 68%, and the Bureau of Labor projects that it will decline to 61% by 2026.


In 2016, the Obama White House produced a 48-page reportacknowledging that immigration does not help the labor force participation rate of the native-born. It concluded, however, that "immigration reform would raise the overall participation rate by bringing in new workers of prime working age."


Although the report used the term "new workers," Democrats may also be tempted by the prospect of new voters. But they should be aware that in courting one group, they risk losing others.


African Americans tend to be a reliable voting bloc for the Democratic Party, but they have repeatedly indicated in public opinion surveys that they want significantly less immigration.


A recent Harvard-Harris poll found that African Americans favor reducing legal immigration more than any other demographic group: 85% want less than the million-plus we allow on an annual basis, and 54% opted for the most stringent choices offered — 250,000 immigrants per year or less, or none at all.


These attitudes are rational.


In a 2010 study on the social effects of immigration, the Cornell University professor Vernon Briggs concluded: "No racial or ethnic group has benefited less or been harmed more than the nation's African American community."


The Harvard economist George Borjas has found that, between 1980 and 2000, one-third of the decline in the employment among black male high school dropouts was attributable to immigration. He also reported "a strong correlation between immigration, black wages, black employment rates, and black incarceration rates."


In a 2014 paper on neoliberal immigration policies and their effects on African Americans, the University of Notre Dame professor Stephen Steinberg argued that, thanks to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, "African Americans found themselves in the proverbial position of being 'last hired.'" Steinberg also noted that "immigrants have been cited as proof that African Americans lack the pluck and determination that have allowed millions of immigrants from Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean to pursue the American dream."


The struggles of black men obviously cannot all be linked to immigration, but it's clear that the status quo does not benefit them.


As elected leaders consider changing our immigration laws, the interests of America's most vulnerable citizens shouldn't be overlooked. The first step toward honest reform is for the Democratic Party to admit that while liberal immigration enforcement might help them win new voters, it also harms and disenfranchises their most loyal constituency.


Dave Seminara is a journalist and former diplomat who served at U.S embassies in Macedonia, Trinidad and Tobago, and Hungary.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...16-story.html#

Immigration and Black Americans: Assessing the Impact

Testimony Before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights


PrintBy Steven A. Camarota on April 5, 2008



The issue of the impact of immigration on black Americans has long been debated. During the previous great wave of immigration at the turn of the last century, most black leaders such as W.E.B. Dubois, Booker T. Washington and A. Phillip Randolph felt that immigration harmed their community. Job competition has traditionally been the key issue, but other concerns exist as well. For example, the strain illegal immigration may create on public services may be particularly problematic for African Americans because, in many cases, schools and hospitals in some black areas are already stressed. Illegal immigration may add to this problem. There is also concern that by increasing demand, illegal immigration may drive up costs for low-income rental housing. When it comes to possible job competition, there are a number of areas of debate, but there are several areas on which there is general agreement. These areas of agreement are important because they should help frame the debate.

I will start my discussion with three areas on which there is general agreement. I will then move on to areas on which there is less agreement.

Three Areas of Agreement

First, there is little debate that illegal immigration primarily, though not exclusively, increases the supply of workers at the bottom end of the labor market. Occupational categories such as building cleaning and maintenance, food service and preparation, and construction are the most heavily impacted (See Table 1). If illegal immigration has a negative impact on U.S.-born workers, it will tend to be on those who have the least education because this is the kind of worker who generally does this type of job.

Second, all of the available data show that black men are disproportionately employed at the bottom end of the labor market. Compared to white men, a much larger share of native-born black men have relatively little education. About six out of 10 adult black men have only a high school degree or failed to graduate high school, compared to about four out of 10 white men (see Figure 1). I have estimated, as shown in Table 1, that about half (47 percent) of black men are employed in occupational categories that could be described as illegal-immigrant heavy. And unemployment among black men averages 13 percent in these same occupations. In contrast, only 34 percent of native-born white men are employed in occupations that have a heavy concentration of illegal immigrants; unemployment for white men averages 7 percent.

Third, there is a large body of research showing that less-educated black men, like less-educated workers overall, have generally not fared well in the U.S. labor market in recent years. This is true whether we look at wages, benefits, or labor force attachment. Workers with less than a high school education or those with only a high school education have seen wages decline or stagnate. The share of these workers offered benefits like health insurance by their employers has also declined. And while employment is cyclical, there has been a long-term trend of declining employment and labor force participation for less-educated native-born men, including less-educated black men.1

The overall deterioration in employment rates, wages, and benefits is a strong indication that less-educated labor is not in short supply. If such workers were in short supply, wages and benefits and employment rates would all be rising, as employers try desperately to attract and retain the relatively few workers available. But this seems to be exactly the opposite of what has been happening. The deterioration in the labor market for less-educated black men is particularly problematic because they already tended to make the lowest wages and have the lowest labor force participation rates.

There may be many possible explanations for the problems experienced by less-educated workers. But anyone asserting that labor is in short supply must directly address the declining wages and benefits. For example, if one argues that trade is a key reason for the decline, then it still means that access to foreign labor, through trade, is increasing the effective supply of labor in the United States and exerting downward pressure on wages. If one argues that technological innovation is increasing productivity, which may also increase the effective supply of workers as well as reduce demand for less-skilled workers, then once again the supply of workers is being increased, and this undermines the idea that workers are scarce. Any assertion that less-skilled workers are very scarce must address the overwhelming economic evidence in wages, benefits, and employment to the contrary. Testimonials from employers who understandability wish to keep wages low, is not systematic evidence.

The Impact of Immigration on Black Workers

Several studies have found that immigration has impacted the wages or employment of native-born African Americans. This includes recent studies by Borjas, Grogger, and Hanson that found that immigration reduces labor force participation of the least-educated black men.2 Research by Andrew Sum, Paul Harrington, and Ishwar Khatiwada at Northeastern University has found that immigrants are displacing young native-born men in the labor market and that the largest impact is on blacks and Hispanics.3 In my own research I have found that blacks are more likely to be in competition with immigrants than are whites.4 A 1995 study by Augustine Kposowa concluded that, "non-whites appear to lose jobs to immigrants and their earnings are depressed by immigrants."5 A 1998 study of the New York area by Howell and Mueller found that a 10-percentage-point increase in the immigrant share of an occupation reduced wages of black men about five percentage points. Given the large immigrant share of the occupations they studied, this implies a significant impact on native-born blacks.6

There certainly is a good deal of anecdotal evidence that employers often prefer immigrants, particularly Hispanic and Asian immigrants, over native-born black Americans. A more qualitative study by anthropologist Katherine Newman and Chauncy Lennon of fast food jobs in Harlem, found that immigrants are much more likely to get hired than are native-born black Americans.7

Some studies have not found an impact on blacks from immigration. Most studies that have found little or no impact are based on comparisons of labor market outcomes across cities with different levels of immigrants. Part of the reason it is hard to estimate the effect of immigration in this way is that we live in a national economy. The movement of capital, labor, goods, and services tends to create wage and employment equilibrium between American cities. Moreover, immigrants are attracted to cities with higher wage and employment growth. This will tend to mask the impact of immigration. As a result, comparisons across cities will tend to understate the immigration effect. Studies that have tended to treat the country as one large labor market have found larger effects than have cross city comparisons.

Conclusion

There is no debate that illegal immigration, and even immigration more generally, increases the supply of workers who are employed in lower-skilled, lower-wage sectors of the economy. It is also uncontested that a significant share of native-born black men have education levels that make them more likely to compete with illegal immigrants. Additionally, there is agreement that wages and employment for less-educated men, including black men, have generally stagnated or declined. The lack of wage growth makes it very difficult to argue that less-educated workers are in short supply. There are a number of studies indicating that immigration is harming the labor market prospects of black Americans. However, the debate over whether immigration reduces wages or employment among black Americans is not entirely settled. If one is concerned about less-educated workers in this country, it is difficult to justify continuing high levels of legal and illegal immigration that disproportionately impact the bottom end of the labor market.

It is important to understand that immigration does not simply reduce wages or employment. There is a good deal of agreement among economists that the benefit to more-educated natives that comes from reducing the wages of the least-educated Americans must be very small. A 1997 study by the National Research Council, The New Americans, has a good explanation as to why the gains are so small. There is no body of research showing large economic gains to native-born Americans from immigration. The primary beneficiary of immigration seems to be the immigrants themselves. A central part of the immigration debate is how we weight the benefits that go to immigrants against the losses suffered by the poorest and least-educated Americans. How one answers this question will have a significant impact on what immigration policy makes the most sense.